[Koha] [Koha-devel] Announcing ... New koha.org Website based on Plone

[Joe Atzberger]

2009/5/8 Eric Bégin <Eric.Begin at inlibro.com>

>  As far as I can tell, a contribution should be something that the company
> as paid or provide the ressource to do something.  Features developped for
> and paid by a client shouldn't be considered as a contribution.
>
> Was the developpment payed by a client?  If so, the client should be
> credited for the integrations/development, not LibLime... does it make
> sense?
>

I realize this section is going to be the point of some discussion, so I am
happy to have it.  But I do not agree with your logic.  The point of the
"for pay" support page is to direct users to companies with Koha expertise.
If a client paid for a feature, that does not make the client any more able
to provide Koha support, or interested in providing it!  Most clients too
busy running their own libraries to establish financial relationships for
Koha support to other users around the world.  So this is not a list of
"benefactors" or "contributors".  Rather it is about people that can help
you now.

A "History of Koha Features" page would be correct to credit the paying
client.  Perhaps the confusion results from the historical structure applied
to a "koha credentials" problem, as Thomas suggested.


> In March 2007, LibLime acquired the Koha division of Katipo Communications,
> Ltd., the original developers of Koha 1.0.
> Not really a contribution...  This is marketing stuff and shoud stay on
> LibLime website.
>

All of the entries on the "for pay" page serve a marketing purpose.  Again,
I think you are confusing "contribution" in the charitable sense with its
usage here, and perhaps more broadly the purpose of a more general "history"
or "credits" page with the purpose of this one.


> My main point here is that the Koha.org website should be as
> vendor-independant as possible.  I really think that the Alphabetical order
> is the best way to reach that goal.
>

Why would chronological order be less informative?  It is certainly less
volatile (additions only to the tip).

I'm not against alphabetical, I just don't see that all other orders are
necessarily "vendor dependent".

-- 
Joe Atzberger
LibLime - Open Source Library Solutions
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.katipo.co.nz/pipermail/koha/attachments/20090508/5483548b/attachment-0001.htm