I usually try my best not to use this mailing list as an advertising tool.
But as people already mentioned our products, I just can't resist.
Considering that you want to get rid of as much work as possible, I do
agree that a Software as a Service solution might be a good fit to your
needs. We have two of those, Open Repository
advanced repository platform) and a more lightweight solution. That latter
may fit your requirements best, as you mentioned looking for a lightweight
option. It's a basic DSpace repository solution that's set up and
maintained by us and runs on a cloud infrastructure. Basically, that means
that the required effort from your end is really limited. Also, you can use
the OAI-PMH protocol to connect with other systems you use.
Let me know if I can provide you with any information.
[image: logo] Ignace Deroost
*250-B Lucius Gordon Drive, Suite 3A, West Henrietta, NY 14586*
*Gaston Geenslaan 14, Leuven 3001, Belgium*
On 26 October 2017 at 16:27, Jason Bengtson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> If you have funds (or you anticipate saving enough funds by ending local
> dspace support), a SAAS platform like what Tom suggests is worth
> considering, so it's worthwhile to throw contentDM into the mix. I'll be
> honest; I never cared for it (the platform lacked flexibility to me), but
> we had it at one library I've worked at, and, if your needs are modest, it
> might meet them. It's completely hosted, so the local hosting overhead is
> eliminated. There's also Digital Commons, although I've also found them too
> limited for my uses in the past, and since their recent change in ownership
> I would regard them dubiously. The thing I would be most careful with, for
> both of those products, would be having a plan in place to migrate your
> data out of them should circumstances change. I've heard of some challenges
> on that front in Digital Commons (although I have no direct experience in
> that area, and things may have improved since I heard that feedback), and
> I'm not sure what the migration options look like in contentDM.
> Here at K-State we use DSpace, but we host our instance on Amazon Web
> Services rather than through local physical or virtual boxes. My systems
> folks have been very happy with this move, which, while keeping us in full
> control of our boxes, has eased some aspects of their management and
> provided us with enhanced reliability.
> All that having been said, I really like what you, Jonathan, and Tom have
> said about looking at looking at an IR as a set of services and
> 'interrogating' what that means and how those services might be delivered.
> I think we, as a profession, need to do that for a variety of products,
> including IRs and catalogs.
> Best regards,
> *Jason Bengtson*
> *http://www.jasonbengtson.com/ <http://www.jasonbengtson.com/>*
> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Josh Welker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > We're a mid-sized university library (10,000 fte) trying to get an IR off
> > the ground to showcase student and faculty research. We've had a DSpace
> > instance running for several years, but we use so few of its features
> > DSpace ends up being more trouble than it is worth. In particular, it's
> > very frustrating to deal with metadata editing, file management, the
> > URL system, and HTML/CSS theming.
> > I am considering leaving the DSpace model in favor of our "IR" just
> being a
> > glorified FTP site that MARC records in our catalog can point to. I might
> > even build a tiny frontend using some scripting language to add IP
> > authentication, URL redirect stuff, or a Google Scholar interface, but
> > that's really it. No metadata modelling, no preservation features, no
> > indexing.
> > Does anyone have experience using a very small, file-based (as opposed to
> > database-driven) application as a foundation for an IR? Are there any
> > problems I should anticipate?
> > Joshua Welker
> > Information Technology Librarian
> > James C. Kirkpatrick Library
> > University of Central Missouri
> > Warrensburg, MO 64093
> > JCKL 2260
> > 660.543.8022