Open Source vs Open Source vs Vendor OpportunitiesVendor Opportunities

Marshall BreedingMarshall BreedingDirector for Innovative Technologies and Director for Innovative Technologies and ResearchResearchVanderbilt UniversityVanderbilt Universityhttp://staffweb.library.vanderbilt.edu/breedinghttp://staffweb.library.vanderbilt.edu/breeding

ASERL Membership MeetingAsheville, NCApril 4, 2007

Software DevelopmentSoftware Development

►Open Source vs. Vendor Beta Open Source vs. Vendor Beta PartnershipsPartnerships

►Pros and Cons Pros and Cons ►Who is Doing What, and Who is Doing What, and ►Is there an Open Source Project Is there an Open Source Project

for ASERL Members?for ASERL Members?

Open SourceOpen Source

►Program source code availableProgram source code available►No license cost for the software itselfNo license cost for the software itself►Can be part of commercial offeringsCan be part of commercial offerings►Anyone can fix problems, add Anyone can fix problems, add

features, etc.features, etc.

Proprietary Software Proprietary Software DevelopmentDevelopment

►Source code kept secretSource code kept secret►Only binary code distributedOnly binary code distributed►License fees charged for softwareLicense fees charged for software►Ongoing development funded by Ongoing development funded by

license fees + maintenance/support license fees + maintenance/support feesfees

Open Source Cost Open Source Cost considerationsconsiderations

►Relative parity with commercial Relative parity with commercial alternativesalternatives

►Other cost components same or greaterOther cost components same or greater HardwareHardware Facilities managementFacilities management Systems administration, security, network Systems administration, security, network

managementmanagement Ongoing developmentOngoing development Integration with enterprise environmentIntegration with enterprise environment Support and serviceSupport and service

Open Source InfrastructureOpen Source Infrastructure

►Linux operating systemLinux operating system►Apache Web ServerApache Web Server

http://www.apache.org/http://www.apache.org/ Tomcat, Xerces, Jakarta, etcTomcat, Xerces, Jakarta, etc

►MySQL databaseMySQL database►Lucene – full text search engineLucene – full text search engine

Open source ILSOpen source ILS

►KohaKoha►EvergreenEvergreen►LearningAccess ILSLearningAccess ILS

KohaKoha

►Originally developed by Katipo Originally developed by Katipo Communications in New Zealand for Communications in New Zealand for Horowhenua Library TrustHorowhenua Library Trust

►Released as Open SourceReleased as Open Source

KohaKoha

Libraries using KohaLibraries using Koha

►~300 (mostly small) libraries~300 (mostly small) libraries►Horowhenua Library TrustHorowhenua Library Trust ►Nelsonville Public LibraryNelsonville Public Library

Athens County, OHAthens County, OH

►Crawford County Federated Library Crawford County Federated Library SystemSystem 10 Libraries in PA10 Libraries in PA

EvergreenEvergreen

►Developed by the Georgia Public Developed by the Georgia Public Library ServiceLibrary Service

►Small development teamSmall development team► June 2004 – development beginsJune 2004 – development begins►Sept 5, 2006 – live productionSept 5, 2006 – live production

Libraries using EvergreenLibraries using Evergreen

►Georgia PINESGeorgia PINES http://gapines.orghttp://gapines.org

►252 libraries in Georgia252 libraries in Georgia Does not include municipal systems: Does not include municipal systems:

Atlanta-Fulton County, Cobb CountyAtlanta-Fulton County, Cobb County

►Experimental evaluationExperimental evaluation King County Library System in WA state.King County Library System in WA state.

EvergreenEvergreen

Learning Access ILSLearning Access ILS

►Learning Access InstituteLearning Access Institute►Turnkey Open Source ILSTurnkey Open Source ILS►Designed for underserved rural public Designed for underserved rural public

librarieslibraries►http://www.learningaccess.orghttp://www.learningaccess.org

LearningAccess ILSLearningAccess ILS

SCOOLSSCOOLS

►South Central Organization of (School) South Central Organization of (School) LibrariesLibraries

►consortium of K-12 school libraries in consortium of K-12 school libraries in NYNY

►Koha derivativeKoha derivative

SCOOLSSCOOLS

LibraryFindLibraryFind

►Metasearch toolMetasearch tool►Developed by Oregon State UniversityDeveloped by Oregon State University►http://libraryfind.org http://libraryfind.org

Library FindLibrary Find

Commercial Support OptionsCommercial Support Options

► Index DataIndex Data►LibLimeLibLime► Index DataIndex Data►Equinox Software, Inc.Equinox Software, Inc.

LibLimeLibLime

►Commercial spin-off from the Commercial spin-off from the Nelsonville Public LibraryNelsonville Public Library

►9 employees9 employees►Recently acquired Koha division of Recently acquired Koha division of

Katipo Communications in New Katipo Communications in New ZealandZealand Original Developer of KohaOriginal Developer of Koha

Equinox SoftwareEquinox Software

►Commercial spin-off of Georgia Public Commercial spin-off of Georgia Public Library ServicesLibrary Services

►Developers of EvergreenDevelopers of Evergreen►No full-time employees, all still work No full-time employees, all still work

for GPLSfor GPLS

Open Source ILS adoption in Open Source ILS adoption in librarieslibraries

►Georgia PINESGeorgia PINES►Nelsonville Public LibraryNelsonville Public Library

ExamplesExamples

►King County Library SystemKing County Library System Serves 1.2 million residentsServes 1.2 million residents 43 libraries43 libraries 19 million annual circulation 19 million annual circulation Investigating viability of EvergreenInvestigating viability of Evergreen

eXtensible CatalogeXtensible Catalog

►http://extensiblecatalog.info/http://extensiblecatalog.info/►Working toward Open Source next-Working toward Open Source next-

generation interfacegeneration interface►University of Rochester’s River University of Rochester’s River

Campus Libraries Campus Libraries ►Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon

Foundation ($283,000)Foundation ($283,000)►Study on needs and requirements, not Study on needs and requirements, not

software developmentsoftware development

Index DataIndex Data

►Zebra database server and indexing Zebra database server and indexing engineengine

►YAZ Toolkit for Z39.50YAZ Toolkit for Z39.50►YAZ Proxy Z39.50 / SRW gatewayYAZ Proxy Z39.50 / SRW gateway►Keystone Digital Library SystemKeystone Digital Library System

Digital RepositioryDigital Repositiory

►DSpaceDSpace HP + MITHP + MIT

►FedoraFedora Univ of Virginia + CornellUniv of Virginia + Cornell Commercial enhancements and support Commercial enhancements and support

from VTLSfrom VTLS

Partnering with Commercial Partnering with Commercial VendorsVendors

Development partner Development partner scenarioscenario

►Capital costs of development born by Capital costs of development born by the vendorthe vendor

►Team of professional programmersTeam of professional programmers►Product managementProduct management►Quality AssuranceQuality Assurance►R&D investmentR&D investment►Market researchMarket research

Library responsibilityLibrary responsibility

► Input in features and designInput in features and design►Early implementationEarly implementation►Testing, evaluation, assessmentTesting, evaluation, assessment

Innovative EncoreInnovative Encore

► 20 development partners:20 development partners:Grand Valley State University, Jefferson County Public Grand Valley State University, Jefferson County Public

Library (CO), Miami University (OH), University of Library (CO), Miami University (OH), University of Western Ontario (Canada), and Wright State University Western Ontario (Canada), and Wright State University (OH), Scottsdale Public Library and the Lillian Goldman (OH), Scottsdale Public Library and the Lillian Goldman Library at Yale Law School, Binghamton University Library at Yale Law School, Binghamton University [SUNY] (NY), Deakin University (Australia), Deschutes [SUNY] (NY), Deakin University (Australia), Deschutes Public Library (OR), Georgetown University (DC), Public Library (OR), Georgetown University (DC), Michigan State University, Nashville Public Library (TN), Michigan State University, Nashville Public Library (TN), Scottsdale Public Library System (AZ), Springfield-Scottsdale Public Library System (AZ), Springfield-Greene County Library (MO), the Tri-College Library Greene County Library (MO), the Tri-College Library Consortium (PA), University of Glasgow (Scotland), the Consortium (PA), University of Glasgow (Scotland), the University of Queensland Library (Australia), University of Queensland Library (Australia), Westerville Public Library (OH) Westerville Public Library (OH)

Vanderbilt Primo ExperienceVanderbilt Primo Experience

►Library-wide decision making processLibrary-wide decision making process►Major investment of library resourcesMajor investment of library resources►Complex project with many Complex project with many

componentscomponents

PrimoPrimo

►New Discovery and Delivery tool for New Discovery and Delivery tool for library content and serviceslibrary content and services

►Next-generation library interfaceNext-generation library interface► ILS bibliographic data + TV NewsILS bibliographic data + TV News

Example of adding local digital contentExample of adding local digital content

► Integrated federated searchIntegrated federated search► Integrated OpenURL linking servicesIntegrated OpenURL linking services

Project costsProject costs

►LITS team leaderLITS team leader►Project ManagerProject Manager►Systems administratorSystems administrator►Major agenda item for Digital Library Major agenda item for Digital Library

Steering CommitteeSteering Committee►5 project teams5 project teams► Intensive effort: Aug 2006 – May 2007Intensive effort: Aug 2006 – May 2007

Balance of work: Vendor / Balance of work: Vendor / LibraryLibrary

► Work performed by the library represents a Work performed by the library represents a very small portion of the overall effort to very small portion of the overall effort to develop the complete systemdevelop the complete system

► Beta-test Libraries not primarily responsible Beta-test Libraries not primarily responsible for:for: Initial product conceptionInitial product conception ProgrammingProgramming DebuggingDebugging Technical designTechnical design Recruitment, training, support for team of Recruitment, training, support for team of

designers, programmers, QAdesigners, programmers, QA► A beta-test library enhances the quality A beta-test library enhances the quality

assurance that the vendor must do anywayassurance that the vendor must do anyway

Advantages to Beta TestAdvantages to Beta Test

►Ability to influence a product without Ability to influence a product without taking on full costs of developmenttaking on full costs of development

►Early adoptionEarly adoption► Increased opportunities to ensure the Increased opportunities to ensure the

product will meet the needs of the libraryproduct will meet the needs of the library► Increases leverage with vendorIncreases leverage with vendor►Discounted capital investmentDiscounted capital investment

Offset by increased investment in library staffOffset by increased investment in library staff

Disadvantages to Beta TestDisadvantages to Beta Test

►Limited degree of involvement on the Limited degree of involvement on the front-end vision of the productfront-end vision of the product

►Less direct advantage to other librariesLess direct advantage to other libraries►Will still have to purchase and pay Will still have to purchase and pay

support for the productsupport for the product►Significant investment of library Significant investment of library

resourcesresources Cost/Benefit ratio?Cost/Benefit ratio?

Advantages to full Open Source Advantages to full Open Source DevelopmentDevelopment

►Full controlFull control Concept/VisionConcept/Vision Features, FunctionalityFeatures, Functionality

►Direct benefit to larger community Direct benefit to larger community that may also use the softwarethat may also use the software

►Less vulnerability to vendor Less vulnerability to vendor abandonment?abandonment?

Disadvantages of Open Source Disadvantages of Open Source DevelopmentDevelopment

► Capital investmentCapital investment Development tools, facilities, hardwareDevelopment tools, facilities, hardware

► Resource investmentResource investment Software design specialistsSoftware design specialists Professional programmersProfessional programmers System administratorsSystem administrators Recruitment, training, managementRecruitment, training, management

► Project management toolsProject management tools► Assessment toolsAssessment tools

Benchmarking, etc.Benchmarking, etc.

Institutional CommitmentInstitutional Commitment

►Who will be responsible for bearing the Who will be responsible for bearing the cost of the projectcost of the project

►Ongoing development of the productOngoing development of the product►Support, maintenance, securitySupport, maintenance, security

Potential projectsPotential projects

►Next-generation catalogNext-generation catalog►ASERL combined catalogASERL combined catalog

Primo implementation that spans multiple Primo implementation that spans multiple ASERL librariesASERL libraries

►Resource sharingResource sharing►Kudzu replacementKudzu replacement►Automation/Tracking for Kudzu Automation/Tracking for Kudzu

delivery servicedelivery service