 |
 |
http://journal.code4lib.org/articles/4438 see KOHA section. Markus Fischer Am 25.01.2012 22:47, schrieb Ethan Gruber: > +1 > > On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Jonathan Rochkind<[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> On 1/25/2012 1:13 PM, Kyle Banerjee wrote: >> >>> itself. For example, there's a system used for many digital archives that >>> splits a field in two anytime a field that needs to be represented by an >>> XML entity is encountered. Name withheld to protect the guilty. >>> >> >> Why are we so eager to 'protect the guilty' in discussions like this? >> >> Our reluctance to share info on problems with software we use (because of >> fear of offending the vendor?) means that it's very difficult for a library >> to find out about the plusses and minuses of any given product when >> evaluating solutions. >> >> Don't even bother googling -- nobody will publically call this stuff out >> on a blog, or even in a public listserv! It's on private customer-only >> listservs and bug trackers, or even more likely nowhere at all. When you >> want to find out the real deal, you have to start from scratch, contact >> personal contacts at other institutions that have experience with each >> software you are curious about, and ask them one-on-one in private. >> Wasting time, cause everybody has to do that each time they want to find >> out the current issues, so many offline one and one conversations (or so >> many people that just give up and don't even do the 'due dilligence'), only >> finding out about things your personal contact happened to have encountered. >> >> Why can't we just share this stuff in public and tell it like it is, so >> the information is available for people who need it? >> >> If you want to find out about problems and issues with _succesful_ >> software that isn't library-specific, it's not hard to. You can often find >> public issue trackers from the developers, but if not you can find public >> listservs and many blog posts where people aren't afraid to describe the >> problem(s) they encountered, there's no 'protecting of the guilty.' Hint, >> this is part of what _makes_ such software succesful. >> >> Jonathan >>