Evergreen ILS

Open Source Library Software

Archives for June 29, 2007

ALA; Open Source is not a distraction

I had a great time at ALA, and obviously, I perked my ears whenever the topic of open source came up (which was a lot). I found it interesting that everyone seemed forced to agree that open source was a good thing, whether it was as infrastructure that even proprietary vendors made use of or as a mechanism or culture for sharing innovations between libraries. But also interesting was the back-handed compliments and spin that would follow those admissions.

PINES was “mostly successful”. Did that mean we only “failed a little bit”?

Open source needs high caliber programmers? How many developers have proprietary companies been laying off lately?

Open source isn’t mature. Could we also claim that the “mature” products out there actually fossilized?

Open source is free as in kitten. Is closed source non-free as in goldfish?

I’m being glib here, but no more so than my counterparts.

Lastly, it was said we should focus on something larger than open source, and that we should be concentrating on open data and standards. And that’s true enough; but what was not said is that open source is your guarantee of having open standards and open data. Source code is the lingua franca of the computer world, and without it your data could not be accessed, and your standards could not be implemented. If you have open source, you have the other two. If you don’t, all you have is promises.

— Jason

ALA; Myths on the Cost of Open Source; Sharing in Positivity

I went to a discussion panel at ALA where a couple of library luminaries shared their views on library innovation. It was a good discussion all around and there were some great questions and comments from the audience. One recurring theme was the “reinforcement of the negative” that pervades the library landscape. For example, harping on how poorly some librarians are paid, how this or that branch closed down, or how people will rain down fire on organizations that try something new. The idea, basically, is that if we focus on the positive and shed our “culture of victimization” we’ll all have a more productive future moving forward. I couldn’t agree more.

At some point in the discussion, an audience member asked the panel to share their views on the effects of open source on library innovation. The panel members were all quick to say “well, yeah, obviously open source helps drive innovation.” Here’s the rub, though. One of the panel members works for a proprietary software vendor and you can guess he wasn’t going to let the conversation stop there. He started mumbling something about the total cost of ownership and how you have to hire real, hard-core developers to administer and maintain open source software. Obviously, we know where his bread is buttered and I expected no less, but I would like the opportunity for a rebuttal.

I would call the vendor’s response a good example of defeatism, exactly what the panel, and this person in particular, was railing at. Again, no real surprises, I’m just amused by public nuggets of hypocrisy. Additionally, I can provide mathematical proof that open source software with a vendor community is in fact better than proprietary software:

  1. Assume your open source software is proprietary software and hire a vendor to install and maintain it.
  2. We have thus proven that open source software is at least as sustainable an option as proprietary software
  3. Now add the OPTION of accessing and understanding the code, contributing to the code, contributing to feature discussions, etc.
  4. Having options is better than not having options. QED.

Oh, and no software licensing fees, having the option of changing support vendors mid-stream, getting support from public forums, blah, blah, blah…

-bill