[Koha] Community Feedback

[Darrell Ulm]

> BWS Johnson <mhelman at ...> writes:
> 
> >
> 
> >Easily said, but practically impossible to accomplish.  And surely other
users would prefer to have their 
> 
> >favorite feature integrated into a release without waiting for every
outstanding bug in unrelated, orphaned 
> 
> >features to be addressed, especially if they are paying developers to
accomplish just that.  
> 
> > 
> 
>            The prevailing attitude in this community prior to arrival of
LibLime was that features and Libraries would not be orphaned and left high and
dry. I used to be very proud to go out and speak to others about the quality of
the programme and the compassion of the community. The more I see the attitude
that if you're not a developer, we don't care what your opinion is, the less
likely I am to recommend it to a friend. The Koha release date has nothing to do
with a custom contract that LibLime promises to a paying customer. A solution is
easily bundled and shipped out to that client. LibLime's lack of planning is not
my emergency, nor are their vendor promises. 

I have not found this to be true. The quality and stability have been good. The
support has been good, and Koha has been cost-saving for us. 

In some respects, Koha 3 has shaped up to be *too* good! About any decent techie
can download it and follow simple instructions to install it, and then you have
a full-featured ILS. Our library saving many thousands of dollars by using Koha
is also a good thing, and it has run very stable for us. All Koha users owe
something to the project, be it time, support, funding, or just thanks to the
people doing the hard work (yes, even if paid, it is still hard work). 

> 
>             Nope, but I knew people that did on a different ILS. Koha develops
much more rapidly than other ILSs, which is nice. But I'm now worried about
losing quality. We've a nearly mature product now. I think some real time in
thinking over what we do in Release 4 or later is warranted. I truly believe
that that has to happen _here_ and not solely on the developer's list. I'd like
to see things work out of the box for different Library sizes and types.

The quality has certainly improved from release to release. As the software
grows more complex, this is more difficult. Koha 3 is a quality release. 
> 
> >
> 
>             There were numerous release dates slated for 3 that I feel should
have been scheduled for further in the future. As a result, numerous dates that
were slated on the roadmap were not met. It would have been better to just set
the date for release further in the future than to have to scrap the date time
and again. I know I was getting antsy for release after 2 or 3 of them were
missed. I realise that the codebase is moving rather quickly, but if that's
disorientating to users and developers alike, then perhaps it's time to put on
the brakes a bit.

Sure, but at some point someone needs to say: "OK, it's a wrap" and then you
have the latest version. One cannot proceed forever. A release number is just a
number. Sure I would have liked to see some of the features of Ubuntu 8 in
Ubuntu 7, but at some point they had to say "It is done, it is officially Ubuntu
7, now on to 8!"

Koha is perhaps one of the biggest innovations ever for the library world. We
could all do more to support it. And one important way is "support!"  Even if
funding is low, and time is minimal, one can just say that this is software with
merits and it should be seriously considered, not rubber stamped, just
considered. That is all. If you are looking for perfect you will find none if
you deal with *any* software. 

Koha is good and has helped many libraries. The programmers work very hard and
should be supported. I officially thank the people who work every day on Koha,
all over the world. Keep up the great work!

-Darrell Ulm