Vendors need to guarantee that software development and support is not a
factor of the software's life-cycle.  Too many library systems products
are being under supported presumably because the products are no longer
generating new revenue for the vendor.  I don't know how that fits into
your manifesto, but I think it is worth mentioning in the context of
this conversation...

Andrew Ashton
Systems Librarian
Scribner Library, Skidmore College

-----Original Message-----
From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Roy Tennant
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2007 1:34 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Library Software Manifesto

On 11/6/07 10:27 AM, "Jonathan Gorman" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> How about an equivalent list from the vendor/software developer's
> I think that would help balance the picture, but perhaps that's
> already in your plans ;).

Funny you should ask...I had originally intended to do this, but then I
was wondering if it start to be redundant -- that is, would a number of
points simply be restated from the vendor's viewpoint? But if there are
unique points to make from that perspective it would be worthwhile to
include them.
This is an area where I consider myself even more ignorant than usual,
so if those of you who work on that side of the fence would like to
chime in with relevant manifesto points from the perspective of
developers and vendors, I'm all ears. Thanks, Roy