đŸ Archived View for gmi.identity2.com âș open_libraries.gmi captured on 2023-06-16 at 15:56:08. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
âŹ ïž Previous capture (2023-01-29)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
A guide for open-minded bibliophiles
Open Voices, Issue 10
Opensource.com
Copyright © 2014 Red Hat, Inc. All written content licensed under a
[Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
License](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/).
Sharing. Collaboration. Community. Open access to knowledge. The right
to build on others' work. Values like these are pillars of open source
software development.
And they inform the mission of libraries all over the world.
Libraries embody the open source wayâperhaps more than any other
cultural institution today. They're bastions of it. Stewards for it. As
spaces for learning, they champion the open distribution and free
circulation of knowledge. As sites for community gatherings, they foster
collaborative endeavorsâfruitful exchanges of resources *and* ideas. And
as symbols of both preservation and innovation, they represent one of
our greatest resources for weathering the turbulence of an ongoing
transition to the 21st century.
In April 2014, Opensource.com invited open-minded bibliophiles to share
stories about the powerful ways open source thinking reverberates
through libraries. During [Open Library
Week](http://opensource.com/life/14/4/open-library-week), we learned
about open source tools libraries might leverage in the face of
ever-mounting budgetary constraints. We saw how libraries are coupling
productively with groups that also embody an open source ethicâthose
makers and hackers committed to innovation through sharing. We glimpsed
something that should be glaringly obvious: libraries are as important
as they've ever been. They may take novel forms as they respond to the
demands of a new era, but what grounds them will never change: a
commitment to the open source way.
Nicole C. Engard (originally published April 2014)
There was a time when working in the library I found it very frustrating
(as many librarians do) that there were so few options for software that
actually did what I needed. In libraries we're so used to there being
this *vendor=software model*. Where one vendor controls a product and
while there might be other similar products, they too are controlled by
a vendor.
This is why libraries need to take a closer look at open source
software.
By removing the "owner" (aka the vendor) from the equation we get a lot
more freedom to make software that does what we want, how we want, when
we want. One of the hardest thing to teach libraries who are switching
to an open source solution is that the power is now in their hands to
direct the software\!
For this very reason, I teach a lot of workshops on open source software
for libraries, and I always find it interesting when I bring up tools
that the attendees have *never *heard of. It is true that it's difficult
to keep up with all the applications out there, so I've compiled a great
list of the **five open source tools** more libraries should know about.
[SubjectsPlus](http://www.subjectsplus.com/) is an open source subject
guide tool. For the non-library types reading this: a subject guide is a
common resource in libraries to point people to relevant resources on a
specific subject. When I first started in libraries, what we were
working with was a series of hard-coded pages full of links. Now we have
tools like SubjectsPlus to do the heavy lifting for us.
SubjectsPlus makes it easy to add staff (or guide managers) and
resources (print, databases, links, and more) so that you can publish a
handy subject guide for your patrons. For example check out the Oakland
University Library's [Course Guide for
CSE 561](http://research.library.oakland.edu/sp/subjects/guide.php?subject=CSE561).
[Libki](http://libki.org/) is a public kiosk management system designed
for libraries by those working in the library\! It allows for you to
manage your public computers in the library (or any public setting) with
minimal set up.
I remember when my first library chose a kiosk management systemâit was
torture to set up and maintain. That's when I went out looking for an
alternative and found Libki.
Using Libki, a library can manage how much time users can have on public
machines, issue visitor IDs with different rules than those of regular
card holders, reserve machines for patrons, and generally manage the
kiosk so that everyone gets their fair share of time. You can see Libki
in action in this [introductory
video](http://libki.org/blog/intro-to-libki-video/).
[BibApp](http://bibapp.org/) is a research social network. It is a neat
tool for academic libraries to use to connect researches on campus with
experts in a field to assist them in their research. Researchers create
profiles and add their works to their profile. This makes it easy for
them promote their work, and it shows the rest of your campus community
what the researcher is working on. For libraries, BibApp makes it easy
to find out what research is being done on campus. See BibApp [in
action](https://connections.ideals.illinois.edu/) at the University of
Illinois.
[Guide on the Side](http://code.library.arizona.edu/gots/) is such an
awesome tool, and it says right on the website: *Know how to use Word?
You already know how to use Guide on the Side\!* This handy little tool
sits on the side of your website or library catalog to walk patrons
through how to use the system. See the tool [in
action](http://www.library.arizona.edu/applications/quickHelp/tutorial/searching-the-ua-library-catalog)
at the University of Arizona.
Basically, you write up your tutorial in the Guide on the Side interface
and then tell it what URL to display on the right of the screen. Your
tutorial can even include a quiz to be sure people are following along
and understand your instructions. This tool could have many uses inside
the library.
[OpenRoom](http://www.bsu.edu/libraries/getopenroom/) allows you to
manage reservations for a library's public spaces. One question I get
over and over in training sessions is for an open source room-booking
application. There are actually several out there, but OpenRoom is
designed by and for libraries. The simple interface allows easy
customization of the theme, creation of reservations through a webform,
and quick setup of rooms and/or groups of rooms. Take OpenRoom for a
[test drive](https://www.bsu.edu/libraries/openroomdemo/).
Dan Scott (originally published April 2014)
As a systems librarian at an academic institution, I am a conduit
between those who want to access the resources our library offers and my
colleagues who describe the resources on behalf of researchers. I direct
our limited development resources so that our systems can best meet the
needs of all of our users. [In their
paper](http://www.nber.org/papers/w14946), Schwarz and Takhteyev claim
that software freedom makes "it possible for the modifications to be
done by those actors who have the best information about their value
\[and\] are best equipped to carry them out."
[Evergreen](http://evergreen-ils.org/), as an open source library
system, enables me to invest my time so that my work benefits not only
our institution, but all other Evergreen-using institutions when I offer
my local work to the project as a whole. This focus on the improvement
of the project as a whole, rather than site-specific enhancements, is a
broadly shared principle of our development community.
Until we adopted Evergreen in 2009, our university used a proprietary
solution that only allowed limited tailoring of the HTML interface via a
proprietary macro language. There was no way to improve the interface
used by library workers; and while batch operations were possible
(assuming you had paid for the "API" training course), there were no
guarantees of data integrity for such operations. The time and effort
learning to customize that proprietary system was largely wasted: there
was no other context in which that expertise could be reused, and
although private forums allowed sites to share customizations, the lack
of open communication and standard version control infrastructure
impeded the collective effort. Feature requests and bug fixes depended
entirely on the limited resources of a single company.
In contrast, the ability to modify any of the source code in
Evergreenâfrom user-facing HTML that uses Perl's robust and broadly
adopted [Template::Toolkit module](http://www.template-toolkit.org/),
down to business logic buried in PostgreSQL database-level
triggersâenables us to directly satisfy the needs of our users and
rewards those who invest their energy in working on Evergreen with
skills that are directly transferable to other projects. For example,
many newcomers to Evergreen quickly develop PostgreSQL skills with
tutorials that we have shared such as [Introduction to
SQL](http://coffeecode.net/archives/263-Introducing-SQL-to-Evergreen-administrators,-round-two.html)
for Evergreen administrators and [full-text search in
PostgreSQL](http://stuff.coffeecode.net/2012/pgopen_fulltext/pgsql-fulltext-intro.html#%281%29).
The use of standard open source infrastructure such as open mailing
lists, bug trackers, and git repositories enables our development
community to make the most efficient use of our time. Our institution
has contributed enhancements including integration with other arcane
library systems (such as OpenURL resolvers), a password reset mechanism,
and the publication of [schema.org](http://schema.org/) structured data
about libraries and their resources in HTML pages for easier consumption
by search engines. But we have in turn benefited many times over from
other community enhancements such as support for citation management
utilities, LDAP authentication, responsive web design, and accessibility
enhancements.
The Evergreen project is about more than just code, however: we joined
the [Software Freedom Conservancy](http://sfconservancy.org/) in 2011 so
that a neutral third party can hold community assets such as trademarks,
domain names, and funds for efforts such as our annual international
conference. This organizational structure, combined with the licensing
of our code under the General Public License and our documentation under
the Creative Commons-Attribution-ShareAlike license, eliminates concerns
that any single participant in our community can hijack our collective
efforts and frees us to collaborate in mutually trusting relationships.
A major benefit of working with open source is the freedom to share the
knowledge and skills that I have acquired by participating in the
Evergreen community. Computer science students at our university have
learned about open source community culture and tools such as bug
tracking, mailing lists, and IRC through talks I have given on the
Google Summer of Code program and tutorials I have led on subjects such
as [git](http://stuff.coffeecode.net/2013/git_tutorial) and [enhancing
HTML5 webpages](http://stuff.coffeecode.net/2014/schema_org_codelab/)
with RDFa structured data. These practical sessions (grounded in my work
with Evergreen) offer a software development-oriented balance to
coursework that is often more academic and abstract.
Finally, we collaborate with fellow projects such as
[Koha](http://koha-community.org/) on improving Perl modules such as
[MARC::Record](http://search.cpan.org/%7Egmcharlt/MARC-Record-2.0.6/lib/MARC/Record.pm)
that deal with relatively arcane library standards. Open source projects
are stronger because we do not view competition between projects as a
zero-sum game; instead, we work with our peers to improve the foundation
of our efforts for everyone.
Sharon M. Leon (originally published April 2014)
Understandably, software developers might wonder how a bunch of
historians ended up shepherding an open source content management system
into the world, but in the case of [Omeka](http://omeka.org/) the
trajectory is a logical one that stems from years of work in open access
public history and cultural heritage projects.
Omeka is a leading open source collections-based web publishing platform
for cultural heritage institutions, researchers, scholars, and students,
developed by the [Roy Rosenzweig Center](http://chnm.gmu.edu/) for
History and New Media (RRCHNM) and the growing open source developer
community it supports. It is released under the GPLv 3.0 license.
Publicly launched in February 2008, Omeka has been downloaded tens of
thousands of times. Unlike many similar platforms, Omeka takes a
user-centered, access-focused approach to collections, emphasizing
approachable, accessible web design and community features. As a result,
a wide range of institutions adopting Omeka include the State Archives
of Florida, the Newberry Library, the Smithsonian Institution, the
Rockefeller Foundation, the University of California, Berkeley, and many
college and university libraries.
Since that initial public launch six years ago, the software and the
team that develops it have grown and changed considerably, but one thing
has remained the same: our commitment to open source technologies and
open access to knowledge and cultural heritage resources. This
commitment derives from RRCHNM's core values and governing principles.
Founding in 1994, the Center was created "to democratize historyâto
incorporate multiple voices, reach diverse audiences, and encourage
popular participation in presenting and preserving the past." Thus, a
predisposition toward openness was built in from the beginning.
As we embarked on the venture of creating a web publishing platform that
would serve the needs of small museums and historical societies, we knew
that our core commitment to open source would have important
implications for our users. The software would be free, and it would
take a community to support and sustain it. That gave us the opportunity
to capitalize on resources that the cultural heritage organizations have
an abundance of: generosity and goodwill (if not tremendous financial
resources or excess human resources). Today, over 350 developers
participate in the "Omeka Dev" Google email group and approximately 1800
users post and answer less technical questions and suggestions on the
Omeka forums.
We regularly integrate suggestions and fix bugs based on community
feedback. To encourage the community to dive in and fork the software,
we [moved Omeka to GitHub](http://github.com/omeka), a popular place for
sharing open source code. Developers can follow the most recent code
updates, comment on them, and submit bug reports. GitHub's social
environment also encourages the community to share their unique branches
of the core, plugins, or themes with others to use themselves.
Omeka is grounded in the flexible Dublin Core Metadata Initiative
schema, which has been attractive to the library and digital heritage
community, and the development team took steps to ensure that no data
becomes siloed in any Omeka site. RRCHNM designed the platform from its
earliest stages to be interoperable with other content management
systems, and item data is shareable through a variety of output formats,
including RSS, Atom, J-SON, and other XML feeds. With a few key plugins
installed, users may make their data recognized by
[Zotero](http://zotero.org/) or import a Zotero library into an Omeka
website. Using the Open Archive Initiative Protocol for Metadata
Harvesting (OAI-PMH) the Center developed plugins that allow users to
share and harvest data sets. Moreover, the current version of Omeka
(2.0) provides a built-in API that opens up a world of possibilities for
collection use and reuse for cultural heritage institutions with more
skilled technical staff.
In 2010, the Library of Congress recognized the centrality of Omeka as
an open source software for the library community by funding two years
in support of ongoing work on the core software and in strengthening the
developer community. The partnership between RRCHNM and the University
of Virginia Libraries' Scholar Lab supported the building and testing of
the Neatline suite of plugins for creating geospatial scholarship, was
held up as a shining example of cross-institutional developer
collaboration. Through that partnership, the Omeka dev team improved
developer and designer documentation and built easier ways for community
members to share plugins and themes they developed for their own
projects with the entire Omeka user base.
Beginning in 2012, we made the Omeka core and its plugins translatable
and invited users to contribute their translations on Transifex, and we
made those available for any Omeka administrator to select as their base
language. Omeka is available in over a dozen languages, with more
started each day. Our community of dedicated users is wide and
expanding. This commitment from an international open source community
will sustain Omeka's development for the coming years.
Open Knowledge (originally published April 2014)
More and more galleries, libraries, archives and museums (GLAMs) are
digitizing their collections to make them accessible online and to
preserve our heritage for future generations. By January 2014, over 30
million objects have been made available via
[Europeana](http://europeana.eu/)âamong which over 4.5 million records
were contributed from German institutions.
Through the contribution of open data and content, cultural institutions
provide tools for the thinkers and doers of today, no matter what sector
they're working in; in this way, cultural heritage brings not just
aesthetic beauty, but also brings wider cultural and economic value
beyond initial estimations.
[Coding da Vinci](http://codingdavinci.de/), the first German open
cultural data hackathon will take place in Berlin to bring together both
cultural heritage institutions and the hacker and designer community to
develop ideas and prototypes for the cultural sector and the public. It
will be structured as a 10-week-challenge running from April 26th until
July 6th under the motto "Let them play with your toys," coined by Jo
Pugh of the UK National Archives. All projects will be presented online
for everyone to benefit from, and prizes will be awarded to the best
projects at the end of the hackathon.
The participating GLAMs have contributed a huge range of data for use in
the hackathon, including highlights such as urban images (including
metadata) of Berlin in the 18th and 19th centuries, scans of shadow
boxes containing insects and Jewish address-books from the 1930s in
Germany, and much more\! In addition, the German Digital Library will
provide their API to hackathon participants. We're also very happy to
say that for a limited number of participants, we can offer to cover
travel and accommodation expensesâall you have to do is [apply
now](http://codingdavinci.de/anmeldung/)\!
All prices, challenges and [datasets](http://codingdavinci.de/daten/)
will soon be presented online.
This hackathon is organized by: [German Digital
Library](https://www.deutsche-digitale-bibliothek.de/), [Service Centre
Digitization
Berlin](http://www.servicestelle-digitalisierung.de/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=917513),
[Open Knowledge Foundation Germany](http://okfn.de/), and [Wikimedia
Germany](http://www.wikimedia.de/).
Blog_*](http://blog.okfn.org/2014/04/03/coding-da-vinci-open-glam-challenge-in-germany/)
developed and released the world's first open source library management
system in 2000. Horowhenua Library Trust named the system **Koha**,
which is a New Zealand
meaning gift or contribution._*
This is a story of why we developed [Koha](http://koha-community.org/)
and how it has changed the way we, and millions of others, work.
In 1999, with a 12 year-old system running on a 386 server, Horowhenua
Library Trust (HLT) needed to replace our library management system
(LMS). We followed the usual Request For Proposal (RFP) process, and
after reading a staggering amount of papers, found we were not satisfied
with any of the options. There were systems available that would
over-deliver at a cost we couldn't afford, systems which we could afford
but didn't meet our needs, and all of the systems had much more
expensive communications solutions than we had been using. Plus, none of
them used a web browser interface.
We engaged Katipo Communications to develop a web-based LMS for us, and
they suggested it be released under the GNU General Public License (GPL)
as a way to ensure the project had longevity (they didn't necessarily
want to spend the rest of their days supporting a proprietary system)
and this would encourage other people to use itâimproving and enhancing
it along the way. The GPL would also ensure that subsequent
modifications and additions by other organisations were open source as
well, benefitting all users.
While "shareware" and "freeware" have been available since the earliest
days of computing, open source software had developed in the years
leading up to 2000 on a different scale entirely. It was no longer
confined to the realm of "hobby" programmes. Open source projects were
starting to produce software that matched or exceeded the quality of
commercial products at the time, and Linux was starting to challenge
Windows in very large-scale projects.
Librarians and free and open source software have lots in common. They
both:
- believe that information should be freely accessible to everyone
- benefit from the generosity of others
- are about communities
However, working with free and open source is a very different way of
working for librarians who are traditionally more comfortable in a
co-dependent relationship with vendors. A significant mind-shift is
required in order to maximise value from open source.
It is NOT about accepting what you are given but articulating what you
want. Librarians need to develop new skills in order to interact or
participate fully in the community that is the heart of open source
projects.
Open source projects only survive if a community builds up around the
product to ensure its continual improvement. Koha is stronger than ever
now because it is supported by an active community of developers,
librarians and vendorsâwho actually talk to each other\!
Each partner has a role to play in a successful open source community:
- **Librarians and the patrons** or end users whose interests they
represent are the ultimate judges as to whether or not a product or
service is desirable, and they define a product or vendor's success.
- **Developers** who create the code and tools.
- **Vendors** filter ideas and bring only the viable, potentially
profitable, and sustainable options to market.
My keynote address at KohaCon09 in Thane, India explored this community
of partnerships and how crucial it is that the interactions between each
is balanced.
When the relationship is in perfect balance the relationship thrives;
vendors get excellent input and feedback on feature development,
exhaustive usability testing for design and function, and truckloads of
free promotion. However, if the desire to have a congenial working
relationship dominates over sound business decisions, development stops
being financially viable and economic sustainability is lost. On the
flip side, if short-sighted business decisions override the needs and
wants of the library, including the open source philosophy, we get into
trouble as well.
When it works well, we get speedy development of solutions that do the
job. A reality check informs technical development; developers don't
just develop something because it sounds cool but because it's a âgood'
solution to an existing problem or will add value. When it gets out of
harmony, we risk getting bad features developed at the initiative of
either the library or the developers. Libraries may request really
useful features but developers may not want to incorporate them, or too
many bells and whistles could get developed, sacrificing function over
gizmos.
Many businesses fall into the trap of focusing most of their energy in
the business side (cost savings, process improvements, efficiencies,
quality control) instead of taking the time to focus on the people and
relationships. When pure business goals start driving development we get
bad stuff happening due to corporate greed, but when we get the balance
right we get high quality, innovative, viable, rapid, and sustainable
development.
While each of the relationships between the partners are important the
holistic view is even more important. It is really important that
librarians are actively involved and don't just leave development to the
developers and vendors. We need to keep in mind the end user who we
serve. For example, if you ask: "Do these new bells and whistles help
the people accomplish something or do they just get in the way?" it
helps you avoid the "just because you can" syndrome.
Linus Torvalds in an interview by Steven Vaughan-Nichols for a
Hewlett-Packard publication had this to say about software development:
The other thing ... that people seem to get wrong is to think that the
code they write is what matters ... No, even if you wrote 100% of the
code, and even if you are the best programmer in the world and will
never need any help with the project at all, the thing that really
matters is the users of the code. The code itself is unimportant; the
project is only as useful as people actually find it."
Moving to open source was philosophically a good fit for Horowhenua
Library Trust. It has also been a good financial and practical decision.
But most importantly it helps us to put the end user, our patrons and
the people we serve, at the heart of decisions we make as an
organisation.
Phil Shapiro (originally published April 2014)
I was intrigued to read this [recent
article](http://www.theguardian.com/local-government-network/2014/mar/26/libraries-us-digital-community-problem-solvers)
in The Guardian about public libraries' new role as community problem
solvers. If you read carefully into this article you'll notice the
author talks about libraries becoming more involved with "proactive
community engagement."
This means that libraries are looking to community members as partners
to help solve community problems. In the open source community, we're
familiar with how well these methods can work. In open source, different
players contribute to group projects according to their own personal
strengths. The results can be far greater than anyone originally
imagines.
Back in 1996, I had an experience at a public library in Washington DC
that gave me a taste of this. At that time I was volunteer teaching an
Library](http://dclibrary.org/chevychase). One day a medical doctor and
his 3rd grade daughter showed up to the class. "My daughter wants to
learn to create web pages," the kindly doctor said. "I don't know how to
build web pages, so my job is to find someone who does." I responded,
"If no one else shows up for the Internet training today, I'll be happy
to teach your daughter how to build web pages."
As it happened, the doctor and his daughter were my only students that
day, and we had a fabulous learning session on basic HTML. I was also
able to explain to this youngster the importance of her protecting her
personal privacy. She walked home that day with her own personal web
page on a floppy disk, and with a basic understanding of HTML, delivered
to her from her public library.
On that day, this parent expected more from his public library, and his
public library delivered. Not via any of their professional staff, but
via a volunteer relationship they had cultivated and nurtured. If you're
interested in learning more about the idea of expecting more from your
public library, this short, engaging book is a must read: *Expect More:
Demanding Better Libraries For Today's Complex World* ([free
download](http://quartz.syr.edu/blog/?page_id=4598)).
A great first step is to help organize a series of [*lightning
talks*](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightning_talk), which are in some
ways short TED talks. Some of you might know this talk format as "ignite
talks" or "pecha kucha." When community members come to the library to
share their most passionate ideas, community fabric is formed. After the
event, the conversations that happen as people walk out of the library
can move the community forward. All of a sudden, the sharing of ideas
moves from within the library walls to the library parking lot, and
beyond.
Another way of open sourcing your public library is to promote awareness
about the maker movement and what that movement offers community. I've
shared some tips for that in this recent MAKE magazine blog post: [*_A
Librarian's Guide to Boosting the Maker
Movement_*](http://makezine.com/2013/08/28/a-librarians-guide-to-boosting-the-maker-movement/).
One other step you can take to bring open source methods to your public
library is to study and share best practices of how human beings in the
past worked together to accomplish shared goals. I was interested to
read a practice of the Wright Brothers where one brother woke up a few
hours earlier than the other brother to help prepare for the day. The
two then spent the day conducting flying experiments at Kitty Hawk. Then
after the first brother went to sleep early, the other brother spent
time analyzing the results of their experiments. By using this
time-shifting collaborative method, the Wright Brothers were able to
comfortably work a long work day, with both brothers getting a full
night's sleep. (Read more: *To Conquer the Air: The Wright Brothers and
the Great Race for Flight* by James Tobin). The Wright Brothers ([and
their sister
Katharine](http://makezine.com/2013/12/17/the-women-behind-the-wright-brothers/))
were collaborative work-hackers as well as outstanding physical
engineers.
One thing our public libraries need more of is ideas about social
innovators. Strike up a conversation with your own library staff (or
Friends of the Library members) and see what transpires. From little
acorns great oaks grow.
- [Opensource.com](http://opensource.com/)
- [Shareable.net](http://shareable.net/)
- [Makezine.com/blog](http://makezine.com/blog)
- American Library Association [OITP Policy
Briefs](http://www.ala.org/offices/oitp/publications/policybriefs)
- [Library-related blog
posts](http://opensource.com/search/apachesolr_search/library) on
Opensource.com
- Twitter hashtag \#newlib
- [@rdlankes](http://twitter.com/rdlankes) R. David Lankes, Library
school professor/book author
- [@shifted](http://www.twitter.com/shifted) Jenny Levine, American
Library Ass'n digital shift chronicler
- [@janieh](http://www.twitter.com/janieh) Janie Hermann, Visionary
programming library at Princeton Public Library
- [@natenatenate](http://www.twitter.com/natenatenate) Nate Hill,
Assistant Director of the Chattanooga Public Library
- [@buffyjhamilton](http://www.twitter.com/buffyjhamilton) Buffy J.
Hamilton, Pathbreaking school and public librarian in Georgia
- [@griffey](http://www.twitter.com/griffey) Jason Griffey,
Librarian/maker/inventor in Chattanooga
- [@davidleeking](http://www.twitter.com/davidleeking) David Lee King,
Topeka, Kansas, digital librarian
- [@lemasney](http://www.twitter.com/lemasney) John LeMasney, Open
source graphics expert/artist/poet in New Jersey
Peter Murray (originally published April 2014)
Libraries of all types have the same questions about open source
software that are asked by technologists in other fields. Does open
source make sense for me? What open source packages mesh well with the
skills already in my organization? Where can I go to get training,
documentation, hosting, and/or contract software development for a
specific open source package?
With funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, we set out to build
tools that help libraries answer these questions. These questions and
answers may be useful to others as well.
In 2012, LYRASIS launched the [FOSS4Lib site](https://foss4lib.org/)
with this tag line: "Helping libraries decide *if *and *which *open
source software is right for them." With that tag line, you could
probably guess that the site has two overarching components. The first
is a set of [decision support
tools](https://foss4lib.org/decision-support) that help libraries decide
if open source is right for them. Libraries are encouraged to start with
a [40 question
survey](http://foss4lib.org/decision-support/control-versus-responsibility)
that helps them think about the way they run software. And because many
smaller libraries do not have in-house IT support, another tool lists a
series of [questions they can ask their IT support
provider](https://foss4lib.org/decision-support/questions-for-parent-it).
We know that open source is free to adopt but not free of costs, so we
also provide [descriptions of
factors](https://foss4lib.org/decision-support/costs-of-open-source-software)
that libraries should track to create a clearer understanding of how the
cost of open source compares to proprietary solutions. Lastly, libraries
need a [software selection
methodology](https://foss4lib.org/decision-support/software-selection)
that puts open source on par with proprietary options.
The second part of the FOSS4Lib site is a [registry of open source
packages](https://foss4lib.org/packages) for libraries and related to
libraries. There are, of course, many such registries out there; this
one is for software specific to libraries and describes software using
terms that libraries would use. We built the registry based on
a [similar tool from the neuroimaging informatics
field](http://www.nitrc.org/include/about_us.php). The registry is like
an open wikiâanyone can [sign up for an
account](https://foss4lib.org/user/register), then add and edit
information that they know about software packages, releases, events,
and service providers.
Updates of registry information are available through RSS feeds and are
[automatically posted to
Twitter](https://foss4lib.org/article/2013/aug/foss4lib-now-publishes-package-and-release-updates-twitter).
The software registry is just thatâpointers to software packages and
their communities' resources. We realized that sites like GitHub,
SourceForge, Google Code, and the like are already providing hosting
sites for projects. We want the registry to be the one place a person
could go to find details about open source projects for libraries no
matter where the projects are hosted.
Coming soon to the FOSS4Lib site is a series of case studies on how
libraries made the decision to adopt open source and documents from an
upcoming symposium on how open source projects in cultural heritage
organizations can find sustainability. Keep watch on the [site
announcements](https://foss4lib.org/announcements) through the RSS feed
or [Twitter account](https://twitter.com/FOSS4Lib) @FOSS4Lib for
details.
And, of course, FOSS4Lib is built using open source. We use the Drupal
content management system and customized it with the content types and
functionality needed to make the registry useful. Although the grant
funding has ended, [LYRASIS](http://www.lyrasis.org/)âa non-profit
association of libraries in the United Statesâis committed to
maintaining the site for the benefit of all.
Libraries have a natural affinity to fundamental tenants of the open
source community. Both recognize the power of collective action and the
value that open communication brings to a community. Each sees the
benefit of building on the work of others and the importance of taking
steps to make that happen. FOSS4Lib is a bridge between these two
communities.
Luis Ibanez (originally publishedd April 2014)
The small town of Bethlehem, New York purchased a 3D printer and started
teaching classes at its [public
library](http://www.bethlehempubliclibrary.org/) recentlyâjumpstarting
the community's knowledge of [advanced
manufacturing](http://www.manufacturing.gov/amp.html) and building upon
a new way of doing things in a world where physical bookstores are
dissappearing.
It's true. Public libraries are reinventing themselves. Today they are
becoming less of a place that hosts physical books and more of a center
where people collaborate, commune, and learn new things.
Check out their program to help kids overcome their shyness when reading
aloud to others by [bringing dogs in to
listen](http://www.bethlehempubliclibrary.org/photos/Oliver5881c.jpg)\!
This year, I reviewed the [Makerbot
Replicator 2X](http://opensource.com/life/14/2/review-Makerbot-Replicator-2X)
and the [Printerbot Simple
Kit](http://opensource.com/education/13/12/review-printrbot-simple-kit).
And around that time, I heard that the Bethlehem Public Library was
looking for volunteers to provide informal demonstrations and training
to its patrons on their new Makerbot 2 and the Makerbot digitizer. So, I
signed up to give back and help out.
The library is unfolding this educational program for the community by
first training volunteers to teach. Volunteers will learn how to guide
others on how to use and operate the machinery. Then, members from the
community will sign up to complete the program. Those who do will
recieve a certification in digital and physical form (a custom 3D
printed token).
source tools are installed in the computer driving the 3D printer:
Those with a certification from the library wil then be able to reserve
the Makerbot 2 and the Makerbot digitizer for up to 2 hours at any given
time to produce their own projects. In order to give back, to help the
library maintain a supply of filament, those community members will pay
the library based on the weight of the project. This approach is not
unlike the method used by many online 3D printing services, like
[shapeways](http://www.shapeways.com/), and I think makes the 3D
printing program sustainable.
Three cheers for Bethlehem Public Library, who is providing an exemplary
effort to educate its community by democratizing this digital
technology\!
The Open Voices eBook series highlights ways open source tools and open
source values can change the world. Read more at
<http://opensource.com/resources/ebooks>.