[Koha] Fwd: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Evergreen foundation (again)

[Joann Ransom]

Hi all,

I like what Atz is saying here and agree. HLT and Katipo are also 
watching this debate very carefully with regards to Kete which is slowly 
building as a community. (kete.net.nz)

I too am worried about trying to formalize this Koha governance to much. 
I think librarians do tend to try and over organise things although we 
are very good at sharing. The OS developers are like thoroughbreds and 
need a really light rein! I also think that it will be hard to have any 
teeth and in how will it actually govern when anyone can  decide to 
fork-off anytime they like. Goodwill and collaboration and peer pressure 
are the tools which will work. However, that isn't to say that someone 
relatively laid back and neutral (HLT) shouldn't  step up and take steps 
to secure the domain name, trademarks etc for the greater Koha community 
to use and own. Keeping them safe from misuse if you like. I like the 
model which has worked surprisingly well over the last decade, other 
than this last big hiccup, and don't really want to throw the baby away 
with the bathwater. The model may need tweaking rather than abandoning.

Cheers Jo.

Joe Atzberger wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 22, 2009 at 5:39 AM, MJ Ray <mjr at phonecoop.coop 
> <mailto:mjr at phonecoop.coop>> wrote:
>
>     Joann Ransom <jransom at library.org.nz
>     <mailto:jransom at library.org.nz>> wrote:
>     > I think forming a combined 'open source in libraries' foundation is
>     > definitely worth considering. I don't know much about Code4Lib as an
>     > organisation, but is that a body tat may have arole to play
>     here? I need
>     > more information!
>
>     I thought code4lib was a conference, email list and website, not a
>     non-profit corporation, so turning that into a FOSS-for-libraries
>     association (please not a foundation) would be about the same amount
>     of work.
>
>     Sharing overheads would be good, but I wonder if the different history
>     of Evergreen may mean the communities are too different, that we would
>     be looking for different things.  For example, conferences and
>     extending development seem high on their list of priorities, but not
>     near the top of our doodle straw-poll.  That may just be because we've
>     had independent conferences and new developers often already.
>
>     Probably worth exploring though.  Anyone willing to try leading that
>     effort?  If so, please add it to
>     http://wiki.koha.org/doku.php?id=kohaheldbyfoundation
>     in the "New FOSS Libraries association or foundation" column.
>
>
>
> Code4Lib members have typically resisted formalization of the 
> community structure overall, while still supporting more defined 
> working subunits (Conference planning, T-shirt committee, the Journal, 
> etc.).  We are likely to find allies in that group, but not a home for 
> a Koha Foundation. 
>
> I think there should be some Koha association (call it "Koha 
> Foundation", "Koha Core", "Koha Crew", "Kohaxors Intl." -- the name is 
> unimportant to me) to serve as the more democratic and active version 
> of what was initially conceived as the role of Kaitiaki.  This seems 
> to me the natural fit, and not overreaching. 
>
> If there is a joining of forces between Koha and Evergreen, I think it 
> should be (at least at first) as a working group, at a low level.  
> "What can we do to help each other?  What code components can we 
> share?"  It is far too soon to talk about merging projects or 
> codebases... let alone hypothetical foundational bodies.
>
> It does not seem reasonable to expect the high level 
> foundation/governance questions to be ironed out simultaneously 
> between both communities when neither has them clarified internally.  
> Indeed, like MJ, I suspect that neither community would much 
> appreciate a formal governance body, in particular since it is hard to 
> see where it would get (1) resources or (2) developers.  Even if a 
> unified body promoted both ILS's, I would still want individual groups 
> that focused on each project, so basically, I think each community 
> should pursue it's own group.
>
> In fact, I can see broader FOSS4LIB type group forming and being 
> active (over more than these 2 projects) more quickly and more 
> effectively than a Koha/Evergreen group (over *just* those 2 projects). 
>
> --Joe Atzberger
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Koha mailing list
> Koha at lists.katipo.co.nz
> http://lists.katipo.co.nz/mailman/listinfo/koha
>   
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: jransom.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 307 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/attachments/20090924/b567dc11/attachment.vcf