[Koha] Liblime, Koha, BibLibre and FLOSS
kyle.m.hall at gmail.com
Sat Oct 24 00:24:32 NZDT 2009
> There are altogether too many exclusionary rules already for being listed
> on the 'pay for support' page . There may even be legal hazard from any
> possible mishap with a litigious library for certifying competence in a
> world of human frailty if the Koha community might be understood to
> function as a trade association in some legal jurisdictions which had
> certified the qualifications of some members.
I don't think the vendor listing has ever made claims about competence.
> I presume we are now moving away from a process where one support company
> or a small group of support companies would exercise exclusive control
> over what appears on the community website.
I believe that is the goal.
> I would prefer banning all mention of paid support services from the
> community website to the nonsensical treatment which has come regarding
> listing support service companies in the past year. I am not recommending
> such a ban but merely identifying what a problem the issue has been.
I like Chris's idea better. List everyone who applies, without
judgment. Maybe even randomize the list on each view.
I believe that removing the vendor list would definitely hurt the
project itself. Right now, if a library is interested, they have one
page where they can find every koha vendor ( at least all the one's
serious enough to get listed. )
> The very thing we should avoid is grandfathering, meaning exempting,
> anyone from the rules. Any rules worth having are rules which should be
> applied equally to all.
As long as Liblime is the only entity with complete control over
koha.org, that's not going to happen.
More information about the Koha