6 ms·

Why public libraries need to support open source

100 points by dluc 10y ago

NateyJay 10y ago
The article doesn't say why open source is more important for library staff to know about than the thousands of other subjects libraries have books on.
- parennoob 10y ago
  I agree -- the article is more of a collection of pointers towards Open Source resources, and doesn't directly say why it's important or interesting. But, at the risk of deviating from the article contents I do have a great reason why they should. It's simple -- as someone who I can't recall said, “If libraries were invented today, they'd be declared illegal and shut down.” We seem to be perpetually moving towards a world where you don't own any content, you have to perpetually license it to consume it; and the company that really owns it can take it away if you can't pay the monthly subscription, or have the wrong name, or happen to travel to another country. Libraries and open source are alike in that both have shown that you can make a model different from the standard “produce this year's widgets / buy this year's widgets” actually work. Libraries buy and discard millions of books per year, and ensure that anyone, regardless of their financial standing has access to literature. Similarly, Open Source has ensured that you don't necessarily have to pay massive sums to Microsoft or Apple or their ilk and comply with their ridiculously restrictive policies in order to run software on the computing hardware you own. Perhaps a bit tenuous, but I think this is a good enough argument that libraries should know about, and possibly promote an interest in Open Source.
  - paulddraper 10y ago
    > If libraries were invented today, they'd be declared illegal and shut down Wow, great quote.
  - the_common_man 10y ago
    > “If libraries were invented today, they'd be declared illegal and shut down." Wow, this is such a great quote. Do you have any sources on who said this? I cannot figure from a simple search.
    - parennoob 10y ago
      I really can't remember. This is the earliest source I can find that basically says the same thing. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100630/12152310025.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100630/12152310025.shtml
- GirlsCanCode 10y ago
  My thoughts, too. I guess this person thinks that if it's not "open source" then people shouldn't have access to it. And that's not right.
- thuuuomas 10y ago
  Computers are the tools of modern librarianship.
jasonthevillain 10y ago
Shouldn't it be the other way around?
- dredmorbius 10y ago
  Both wouldn't be bad.
reustle 10y ago
I was hoping this was an argument for the software powering libraries to be open source :)
gnicholas 10y ago
Libraries do support open source software. In some cases, they even create it. For example, Enki, an ebook platform created by Califa (a consortium of CA libraries) was created in response to OverDrive (a larger for-proft ebook platform). This isn't to say that they couldn't do more to get the word out about consumer-facing open source projects/tools, but we should give credit where it's due.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- baldfat 10y ago
  Evergreen is the best Open Source Solution. They Georgia Libraries made their own after all the money and frustration using a closed source one. https://evergreen-ils.org https://evergreen-ils.org
tuukkah 10y ago
An open source library system is one good way to get libraries first-hand experience with the advantages: http://www.koha.org http://www.koha.org
cyphar 10y ago
And this is why I don't use the term "open source" anymore. The "top 5 reasons to use open source" are all completely disconnected and don't really have any logical progression from the "ideals of open source" ("open source" doesn't have an ideology). Why libraries should use free software is a much more straightforward list: 1. Free software means that libraries can be assured that they can continue running on the same software and freely maintain it, without needing to worry about downgrades or license agreements. 2. Free software means that libraries can collaborate on improving the software they use (and help one another to run their libraries efficiently) without violating a proprietary license agreement. 3. Libraries are meant to be stewards of knowledge, and proprietary software takes away your ability to learn about software. Free software solves this problem, for the patrons as well as the librarians. 4. The reading history of an individual should remain private, and there is no way for a library to be sure of this without using free software. A reading history that can be used as evidence threatens human rights. 5. A library running on free software cannot ever be pressured by developers to stop distributing some form of book. As libraries are a primary source of information and knowledge, this is a freedom of speech issue and can only truly be solved by free software. All of the above list clearly links to the four fundamental freedoms (with emphasis on my own politics). But that's why I invite everyone to refer to free software by it's proper name.
- onion2k 10y ago
  Free software means that libraries can be assured that they can continue running on the same software and freely maintain it, without needing to worry about downgrades or license agreements. While true in principle, that doesn't happen very often. A large open source application that's abandoned by it's maintainer(s) will die very quickly, and it's hard to find someone who'll take on the job of maintaining it even if you're willing to pay. Of course, using a closed source alternative will have the same issue, but without the possibility of someone taking over, so it's worse. The ideal course is to use an application, regardless of license, that supports an open standard for importing and exporting your data so you're not locked in; that way you can transition everything to an alternative application should things go wrong.
  - 10y ago
aargh_aargh 10y ago
"Site under maintenance" Archived URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20161007165853/https://opensource.com/life/16/9/public-library-open-source http://web.archive.org/web/20161007165853/https://opensource...
baldfat 10y ago
Former Librarian (9 years out) : I was shocked at the negative reaction I received from all librarians at the time with the terms Open Source / Free Software. Caused is the proprietary nature of the Library Systems. They were so archaic and backwards it caused me to look for a new job within 6 months. Mine was from Sirsi Dynix. Steve Balmer had nothing on these people. My servers was a Windows Server with a Oracles DB Array and a few other servers. I was required to reboot daily my windows box and I had to halt the whole system so I could do my daily backups. It was horrible (I also had to switch to two systems since they killed the system we purchased from them (prior to my arrival)) In total about 120 hours of webinars in 3 months can cause anyone to lose the will to hear and see anything. So I started the research to replace everything to Open Source (Evergreen) and the onslaught was intense. I was just doing research and they were already telling my boss how everything they did wrong was my mistake. I had the logs to show that they were lying and a boss who trusted me, but it was SO FRUSTRATING. They would do everything to discourage the ideals of Open Source in conferences they would have info sheets just spreading FUD about the insecurity of Open Source since Hackers could have access to the whole code. Wikileaks even did a release. Check out the Librarian defending the FUD. http://jasongriffey.net/wp/2009/11/03/sirsi-dynix-vs-open-source-software/ http://jasongriffey.net/wp/2009/11/03/sirsi-dynix-vs-open-so... So glad I am not a Systems Librarian today. That and paying tens of thousands every year for old dusty journals pay for by tax dollars.

100 points by dluc 10y ago

The article doesn't say why open source is more important for library staff to know about than the thousands of other subjects libraries have books on.

parennoob 10y ago
I agree -- the article is more of a collection of pointers towards Open Source resources, and doesn't directly say why it's important or interesting. But, at the risk of deviating from the article contents I do have a great reason why they should. It's simple -- as someone who I can't recall said, “If libraries were invented today, they'd be declared illegal and shut down.” We seem to be perpetually moving towards a world where you don't own any content, you have to perpetually license it to consume it; and the company that really owns it can take it away if you can't pay the monthly subscription, or have the wrong name, or happen to travel to another country. Libraries and open source are alike in that both have shown that you can make a model different from the standard “produce this year's widgets / buy this year's widgets” actually work. Libraries buy and discard millions of books per year, and ensure that anyone, regardless of their financial standing has access to literature. Similarly, Open Source has ensured that you don't necessarily have to pay massive sums to Microsoft or Apple or their ilk and comply with their ridiculously restrictive policies in order to run software on the computing hardware you own. Perhaps a bit tenuous, but I think this is a good enough argument that libraries should know about, and possibly promote an interest in Open Source.
- paulddraper 10y ago
  > If libraries were invented today, they'd be declared illegal and shut down Wow, great quote.
- the_common_man 10y ago
  > “If libraries were invented today, they'd be declared illegal and shut down." Wow, this is such a great quote. Do you have any sources on who said this? I cannot figure from a simple search.
  - parennoob 10y ago
    I really can't remember. This is the earliest source I can find that basically says the same thing. https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100630/12152310025.shtml https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100630/12152310025.shtml
GirlsCanCode 10y ago
My thoughts, too. I guess this person thinks that if it's not "open source" then people shouldn't have access to it. And that's not right.
thuuuomas 10y ago
Computers are the tools of modern librarianship.

jasonthevillain 10y ago

Shouldn't it be the other way around?

dredmorbius 10y ago
Both wouldn't be bad.

reustle 10y ago

I was hoping this was an argument for the software powering libraries to be open source :)

gnicholas 10y ago

Libraries do support open source software. In some cases, they even create it. For example, Enki, an ebook platform created by Califa (a consortium of CA libraries) was created in response to OverDrive (a larger for-proft ebook platform). This isn't to say that they couldn't do more to get the word out about consumer-facing open source projects/tools, but we should give credit where it's due.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
baldfat 10y ago
Evergreen is the best Open Source Solution. They Georgia Libraries made their own after all the money and frustration using a closed source one. https://evergreen-ils.org https://evergreen-ils.org

tuukkah 10y ago

An open source library system is one good way to get libraries first-hand experience with the advantages: http://www.koha.org http://www.koha.org

cyphar 10y ago

And this is why I don't use the term "open source" anymore. The "top 5 reasons to use open source" are all completely disconnected and don't really have any logical progression from the "ideals of open source" ("open source" doesn't have an ideology). Why libraries should use free software is a much more straightforward list: 1. Free software means that libraries can be assured that they can continue running on the same software and freely maintain it, without needing to worry about downgrades or license agreements. 2. Free software means that libraries can collaborate on improving the software they use (and help one another to run their libraries efficiently) without violating a proprietary license agreement. 3. Libraries are meant to be stewards of knowledge, and proprietary software takes away your ability to learn about software. Free software solves this problem, for the patrons as well as the librarians. 4. The reading history of an individual should remain private, and there is no way for a library to be sure of this without using free software. A reading history that can be used as evidence threatens human rights. 5. A library running on free software cannot ever be pressured by developers to stop distributing some form of book. As libraries are a primary source of information and knowledge, this is a freedom of speech issue and can only truly be solved by free software. All of the above list clearly links to the four fundamental freedoms (with emphasis on my own politics). But that's why I invite everyone to refer to free software by it's proper name.

onion2k 10y ago
Free software means that libraries can be assured that they can continue running on the same software and freely maintain it, without needing to worry about downgrades or license agreements. While true in principle, that doesn't happen very often. A large open source application that's abandoned by it's maintainer(s) will die very quickly, and it's hard to find someone who'll take on the job of maintaining it even if you're willing to pay. Of course, using a closed source alternative will have the same issue, but without the possibility of someone taking over, so it's worse. The ideal course is to use an application, regardless of license, that supports an open standard for importing and exporting your data so you're not locked in; that way you can transition everything to an alternative application should things go wrong.
- 10y ago

aargh_aargh 10y ago

"Site under maintenance" Archived URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20161007165853/https://opensource.com/life/16/9/public-library-open-source http://web.archive.org/web/20161007165853/https://opensource...

baldfat 10y ago

Former Librarian (9 years out) : I was shocked at the negative reaction I received from all librarians at the time with the terms Open Source / Free Software. Caused is the proprietary nature of the Library Systems. They were so archaic and backwards it caused me to look for a new job within 6 months. Mine was from Sirsi Dynix. Steve Balmer had nothing on these people. My servers was a Windows Server with a Oracles DB Array and a few other servers. I was required to reboot daily my windows box and I had to halt the whole system so I could do my daily backups. It was horrible (I also had to switch to two systems since they killed the system we purchased from them (prior to my arrival)) In total about 120 hours of webinars in 3 months can cause anyone to lose the will to hear and see anything. So I started the research to replace everything to Open Source (Evergreen) and the onslaught was intense. I was just doing research and they were already telling my boss how everything they did wrong was my mistake. I had the logs to show that they were lying and a boss who trusted me, but it was SO FRUSTRATING. They would do everything to discourage the ideals of Open Source in conferences they would have info sheets just spreading FUD about the insecurity of Open Source since Hackers could have access to the whole code. Wikileaks even did a release. Check out the Librarian defending the FUD. http://jasongriffey.net/wp/2009/11/03/sirsi-dynix-vs-open-source-software/ http://jasongriffey.net/wp/2009/11/03/sirsi-dynix-vs-open-so... So glad I am not a Systems Librarian today. That and paying tens of thousands every year for old dusty journals pay for by tax dollars.