This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig51DA77426CD394472F661EBC Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------040700070904050902020600" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------040700070904050902020600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi folks, (Apologies in advance for the HTML mail, but i couldn't find a better way to represent the table below...) I've been evaluating implementing a couple of small libraries (my church and home, both around 1000 volumes) on Emilda and Koha, and i'd be interested in comments from people about their relative strengths and weaknesses. I'm coming from the perspective of a K-12 school IT manager with a Unix background. I don't know much about library cataloguing (although i'm learning), and MARC is almost incomprehensible to me (as it is to all of the librarians i know). :-) I'd really love to convert my school (about 80,000 resources) from a proprietary system to Koha, and i'm using these libraries as guinea pigs. However, my call is not final at school: there are a number of other staff to convince. The merits of free software would have to be pretty strong for us to only save around AU$1000/year (the maintenance contract on our existing library system), not to mention that there's no local phone support. Neither Koha nor Emilda seems to have the features to challenge the more school-oriented library systems yet. Here are my perceptions so far: Product Pros Cons Emilda * Very easy to install on Debian * Z39.50 cataloguing is easy to set up and robust * Simple interface * Easy to hack on (PHP-based) * Exposes a lot of MARC & Yaz; adding search and cataloguing fields requires advanced skills * Developer/user communities not so active (user mailing list about 1/10th the traffic of Koha's) * Requires login to self-loan and -return Koha * Nice features in interface (e.g. cover images) * Pretty (the suggested demo sites look awesome!) * Seems to have quite an active developer and user community * Install not so simple - no Debian package; requires messing about with CPAN * Requires separate Z39.50 daemon that, when last i used it (not the current version), broke easily and frequently * Interface is moderately complex (a moderate amount of MARC) * I hate Perl (i know it to a reasonable level of competency, and write scripts in it regularly - i just hate looking at it). Can anyone comment on whether: * Koha has pros for Emilda's cons? (Self-loan and return seems to be one.) * Koha's cons have improved since i last looked at it? Are there any other considerations that i should be looking at? Low maintenance is a priority for me - after i've implemented the systems, i won't have a lot of time to spend on them. Both products seem to fit the bill in this respect, although i haven't tried to restore one from backup yet. ;-) Thanks for listening, Paul -- Did you know? Microsoft Internet Explorer and Outlook have a poor track record for security . Why not try one of the more secure alternatives from ? --------------040700070904050902020600 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi folks,

(Apologies in advance for the HTML mail, but i couldn't find a better way to represent the table below...)

I've been evaluating implementing a couple of small libraries (my church and home, both around 1000 volumes) on Emilda and Koha, and i'd be interested in comments from people about their relative strengths and weaknesses. I'm coming from the perspective of a K-12 school IT manager with a Unix background. I don't know much about library cataloguing (although i'm learning), and MARC is almost incomprehensible to me (as it is to all of the librarians i know). :-)

I'd really love to convert my school (about 80,000 resources) from a proprietary system to Koha, and i'm using these libraries as guinea pigs. However, my call is not final at school: there are a number of other staff to convince. The merits of free software would have to be pretty strong for us to only save around AU$1000/year (the maintenance contract on our existing library system), not to mention that there's no local phone support. Neither Koha nor Emilda seems to have the features to challenge the more school-oriented library systems yet.

Here are my perceptions so far:

Product	Pros	Cons
Emilda	Very easy to install on Debian Z39.50 cataloguing is easy to set up and robust Simple interface Easy to hack on (PHP-based)	Exposes a lot of MARC & Yaz; adding search and cataloguing fields requires advanced skills Developer/user communities not so active (user mailing list about 1/10th the traffic of Koha's) Requires login to self-loan and -return
Koha	Nice features in interface (e.g. cover images) Pretty (the suggested demo sites look awesome!) Seems to have quite an active developer and user community	Install not so simple - no Debian package; requires messing about with CPAN Requires separate Z39.50 daemon that, when last i used it (not the current version), broke easily and frequently Interface is moderately complex (a moderate amount of MARC) I hate Perl (i know it to a reasonable level of competency, and write scripts in it regularly - i just hate looking at it).

Can anyone comment on whether:

Koha has pros for Emilda's cons? (Self-loan and return seems to be one.)
Koha's cons have improved since i last looked at it?

Are there any other considerations that i should be looking at? Low maintenance is a priority for me - after i've implemented the systems, i won't have a lot of time to spend on them. Both products seem to fit the bill in this respect, although i haven't tried to restore one from backup yet. ;-)

Thanks for listening,

Paul
<http://paulgear.webhop.net>
--
Did you know?  Microsoft Internet Explorer and Outlook have a poor track
record for security <http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/713878>.  Why not
try one of the more secure alternatives from <http://mozilla.org>?

--------------040700070904050902020600-- --------------enig51DA77426CD394472F661EBC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEav92Y1u5R057COQRAhytAKCKG9DPChRsePebIVDVZzv/Dkj+QwCgqVDD nptLf4XcrDfZ8ZGHpY4Vsvk= =4Br/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig51DA77426CD394472F661EBC--