[LIS-Forum] Fwd: Regarding SOUL 2.0 V/s Open Source Software

22 Mar 2009

      ---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Dr Pawan Kumar Gupta 
Date: 2009/3/22
Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] Regarding SOUL 2.0 V/s Open Source Software
To: forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
Cc: pku@nic.in, "Dr. Jagdish Arora" 

Dear Upadhyay and other friends,

I share the views expressed (by Upadhyay and a few others thinking in line
with him).

This is not the job of a librarian to simply move in to the area of
programmer. If we are not supposed to be electrician, a sweeper, an
engineers, or a doctor; where is the problem if we are not a programmer.

We should be able to understand the language of the programmer like other
professions, we should be able to express our needs effectively and hire the
services of programmers.

It would be better if we devote our selves in understanding lib & inf sc
better, as compared to using our major part of the time in understanding
code of open source software. We should use available helpful
semi-commercial (like SOUL, hardly a cost in comparison to other commercial
software), or if we wish to and can afford commercial software like LIBSYS
and so on rather than start understanding the code for OSS.

"If they could have used even CDS/ISIS or an MS ACCESS database for data
entry at least 60% work could have been over in terms of automation." is a
perfect view. i have devoted some time in counselling in IGNOU programmes
etc. And with regular interactions with LIS personnel, especially in
Rajasthan, I am of the firm view that given the manpower and infrastructure,
and keeping in view the finances available with majority of college and
public libraries they should go with something like WINISIS for generating
their catalogue and afford effective searching for their patrons. Now with
SOUL, not a costly software, and regular support from INFLIBNET (already the
improved free replacement with SOUL 2 available), small and medium sized
libraries should go for such products.

We need to automate all libraies with the means available at our disposal.
People in the profession having a better understanding should devote to
"migration, data conversion or enterprise integrating those softwares
solutions" used by various libraries.

Nicely written Mr Upadhyay, needs to be applauded.
With best wishes.

2009/3/16 Upadhyay P K 

 Dear professionals,
...
My view regarding open source solution vs proprietary are as follows.
1. There are ceratin myths about open source softwares. It is a good topic
of discussion and academic study and reserch.  But the moment we try to
implement, problems arise out. Of course in any new implementation/change,
there are problems. People are the most important component in any solution
, open source or closed source.
2. Total cost of ownership(TCO) is high in case of open source solution. If
you consider the Software installation, server setup, training, AMC,
hosting, security, follow-up, customization the cost will be high.  In
relation to the total implementation, cost of software is negligible. We
should not be worry about the open or closed softwares, our motive should be
Proper Information Systems Solution. The management and parent organization
never stop if a good proposal with time bound implementation is put for
financial approval. Government of India has allocated Rs 23000 crore for
eGovernance during 11th Plan . Many of the organizations are not able to
spend their ICT bugdet or sometime spend anyhow.
3. In India we are fighting for the softwares and codes developed by
Western Countries- both Open Source tools, OS, Systems Softwares and
majority of the open source softwares( for example Windows, Linux, .NET,
JAVA, IIS, Apache, etc). They are developing and launching these projects,
and in developping countries including India we are not able to decide which
software are to be used. Althogh we should appreciate the efforts of
NEWGENLIB team from India and many Open Technology Centres have been
started.
4. Only people are talking in fashion of open source, freedom of owning ,
because it seems free but it's not if you talk of total solution. It has
become a fashion to talk  of RFID, SmartCard, Web 2.0, Social Networking,
MARC, UNICODE, Mobile OPAC, Digital Libraries, etc, even if there is no
basic infrastructure like latest hardware, networking infrastructure, web
hosting , data entry plan, etc.
5. Earlier also there were almost free software like CDS/ISIS from UNESCO,
DELPLUS from DELNET(with only Rs 7500 or so), SOUL for college university
from INFLIBNET (with Rs 50000),  but libraries did not utilize the
opportunity. Majority of libraries does not have capability to understand
simple codes of HTML and changing their logo in the software. Actually LIS
professionals are not supposed to be programmers. They should be information
systems manager.
6. Unless somebody takes responsibility of support or stamps the product,
it  is not advisable to use the open source softwares . It may be security
problem.
7. I  have experience of regularly interacting with many big organizations
and libraries throughout India that are struggling in selecting the LMS
softwares since many years. They have not yet started Data Entry of books.
 If they could have used even CDS/ISIS or an MS ACCESS database for data
entry at least 60% work could have been over in terms of automation.
8  Some libraries I have seen, are not able to publish their OPAC on
Internet and maintaning database on local LAN machine. They have used many
open source softwares of LMS, Digital Library, Repository learnt in
different forums and training programmes. But when question comes of
migration, data conversion or enterprise integrating those softwares
solutions, they need huge money and running here and there.
9. There are around 5 lakh libraries in the country including schools,
hardly 10% of these may be automated  using Library Management Softwares. We
have to make them automated using open source or closed  at the earliest.
Here all the stakeholders are required to join and contribute. Only talking
of open or closed will not be sufficient.
10. My point in discussing these issues  is not to discard the open source
softwares, but more of providing the right kind Information Systems solution
in totality for Indian libraries. Of course there is open revolution
throghout world .
with regards
P K Upadhyay
NIC , Delhi
----- Original Message -----
From: Parthasarathi Mukhopadhyay 
Date: Monday, March 16, 2009 10:18 am
Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] OpenSource Debate
To: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
...
Dear all
A good logical and time befitting debate started at last. I'm
completely agreed with Mr. Singh and would like to add a few
point in that ....
1. Close source commercial LMSs are non-transparent in the use
and application of standards, whereas FLOSS based LMSs are very
clear in this direction (take the example of Koha, right from
the 1999 it is trying to follow and implement all the global
internationally agreed upon standards e.g. EDIFACT, NCIP, Z39.50
etc.);
2. Close source commercial LMSs are still not compliant with Web
2.0 tools, techniques and philosophy. FLOSS based LMSs are quite
accommodative in this regard, for example, Koha 3 is RSS
compliant (it produce RSS feed for every search query issued by
users), supports Tag submission by users to describe a resource,
users can post their comments on a particular resource available
in the library. In short it follows participative architecture
or user-at-the centre stage model. Unfortunately no other LMSs
is presently web 2.0-enableb;
3. Koha (2.x and 3.x) is web-centric in architecture;
4. Fully compatible with Unicode 5.1 and thereby ensures
storing, processing and retrieval of Indic script based resource
(see www.granthalaya.org for a live demo);
5. Koha 3 supports information mashup - in fact we are noe able
to snatch cover page images from Amazon without scanning pages
or writing a single line of code (see the site of Department of
LIS, University of Burdwan @
http://burdwan01.kwc.kohalibrary.com/ - search digital library
or LIS related terms).
Hope to see a brave open world
Dr. Parthasarathi Mukhopadhyay
Department of Library and Information Science
University of Burdwan,
Burdwan, Rajbati - 713104, WB
---------------------------------------------------
...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sukhdev Singh" 
To: "SatishDpnd@Adroit" 
Cc: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
Subject: Re: [LIS-Forum] SOUL-NewGenLib-OpenSource Debate
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 11:16:33 +0530
Dear All,
I don't think we should shy away from any debate. But unfortunately
LIS Community in India seems to be relatively shy of healthy
debates.>
If I am given a chance to implement a Library Automation
System, I
would prefer a model in the following order:
1. Open Source Solution. For the freedom it provides in terms of
'owning' the systems for long term use. I won't mind taking a paid
support service.
2. Free Software. For it won't burden my budgets and won't
trouble me
with approvals of higher authorities.
3. Commercial Solution. I would be going for it if none is available
in Open Source domain. I will keep myself ready for migration
to an
Open Source Solution.
I still feel that efforts required for training and implementation
remains the same for all models of softwares.
I would still like to hear more on KOHA Vs NewGenLib. I am impressed
with the Delhi Public Library's ( http://dpl.gov.in/ )
implementation> of KOHA, though I have no idea of inside story
about it. I would like
to see NewGenLib's implementation available for public view.
Thanks
--Sukhdev Singh.
...
In response to LIS-Forum Digest, Vol 72, Issue 13 : Message
2 and earlier
discussions on the topic
Dear LIS professionals
The debate on NewGenLib v/s SOUL is simply not necessary
because I feel both
are meant for different segments of LIS market.  SOUL
was developed by
INFLIBNET years back under the aegis of UGC to support
academic Library
community which at that time was unable to invest in
...
initial College edition of SOUL was costing merely
Rs.15,000/- (until
recently) when proprietary standalone LMS was costing Rs.1
lac.  There are
more than 1600 SOUL installations in India.  Just think
of them !  What
should they do ?  Get free-upgrade of SOUL 2.0 (with
moderate costs of
installation) or go for NewGenLib/Koha which is free and
open source.  SOUL
2.0 has added many more facilities to its previous
version.  It's web-based,
many International Standards have been adopted and it is SIP2/NCIP
compatible too.  Now think of those smaller libraries
which have only couple
of staff, what should they do ?  Use readily available
upgraded LMS or
switch over to free, open source NewGenLib or Koha - for
which neither they
have expertise nor time to devote.
All of us those who are adopting Open Source software know
very well that
it needs substantial staff-time-investment - may it be for
data migration,
customising each function to suit to one's needs or even
fixing small
problem of default currency.  Open Source LMS is only a
...
whether one can make a racing car out of it or not depends
upon availability
of the workshop facilities, latest tools and machinery,
research staff to
support and designing team to take care of its
dynamics.  Therefore I would
not blindly support Open Source just because it is almost
free compared to
proprietary LMS - but would strongly advocate use of SOUL
2.0 by those who
would like to concentrate more on user-services than
breaking their heads in
customising Open Source LMS.
SOUL 2.0 is a step towards upgrading efficiency of LIS
community as a whole
at very negligible input costs.  Those who feel the
SOUL 2.0 rates are high
should enquire for  rates for proprietary LMS in the
market, and also how
much would it cost to customise Open Source with facilities
which are
offered by SOUL 2.0.
I have yet not come across any fully operational Open Source
LMS in any of
the large Libraries in India.  Many open source
agencies claim that each and
every module/facility can be customised, e.g. Template
designs, RSS Feeds,
Blogs, Federated Search, scheduled auto e-mail generators,
Customised> > Reports, MIS stats, Online Reservation facility,
built-in SIP2/NCIP,
Video-streaming facility through web-OPAC, importing records
from web
catalogues, exporting records in variety of formats, remote
log-ins, Serials
Management etc., but when it comes to practical
implementation, it takes
months together to mould them to match needs of the organisation.
Therefore I will never ever criticise indigenous LMS like
SOUL.  It is/was
developed for specific cause/purpose and not for competing
with proprietary
LMS or to discourage use of Open Source LMS.  We all
should recommend it to
all those who are short of resources and do not have
time/expertise to
customise freely available open-source.
Would certainly welcome your views
Happy LMSing !
satish deshpande
formerly Head British Council Library Ahmedabad
Mentor, Nirma University Libraries; Adviser, KM&IC, National
Institute of
Design, Ahmedabad
M     :   098250 30460
email :  satish.dpnd@gmail.com
In response to LIS-Forum Digest, Vol 72, Issue 13 : Message 2
...
Message: 2
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 13:56:14 +0530 (IST)
From: "I.R.N.Goudar" 
Subject: [LIS-Forum] SOUL-INFLIBNET-NEWGENLIB
To: lis-forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
Message-ID: 
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Dear Professionals,
Herewith I have forwarded my response I sent through lis-
forum soon after
the announcement of NewGenLib as open source software. My
message answers
few questions raised by few LIS colleagues. Ther is no poin
in discussing
the merits and demerits of SOUL, GRANTHALAYA, Maitreyee,
Suchika, etc.
At this juncture of avilability of open source software,
what should be
our (librarians) stand? What responsible institutions like
INFLIBNET,> >> NISCAIR, DRTC, NIC, Keshavan Institute, etc
should do? Government has
spent lot of  money various agencies for the
development of good library
automation  system. Some of them were cooked half?
Discontinued further
developments? some of them never saw the light of the day?
Some of
them did not get good support after sale or implementation?
While I have
full confidence in the capability and vision of present
On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 7:51 PM, SatishDpnd@Adroit
 wrote:
proprietary LMS.  The
powerful engine, but
director of
...
...
INFLIBNET for developing SOUL as one of the good system, my
basic question
is, at this juncture is it necessary still put efforts and spend
money on such developments, when so many open source
softawre are
available? NEWGENLIB, apart from using open source
flatform, uses only
open standards. It has stood test ofthe time. At national
level we
should have customization, migration and support service
arrangements on any open system we adopt. MY LIS-FORUM
MESSGE SENT ON
11 JAN 2008, GIVES SOME SUGGESTIONS IN THIS MATTER (Copy
enclosed below)
Goudar
------------------------------------------------------------

...
...
...
Dr. I.R.N.
Goudar                         Tel: 91-80-25086081
Sci F & Head, Information Centre
for      91-80-25235315
Aerospace Science and
Technology          Fax: 91-80-25268072
National Aerospace
Laboratories           E-mail:goudar@css.nal.res.in
Airport Road, BANGALORE-560 017  India
http://www.icast.org.in/staff/goudar.html
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
LIS-Forum mailing list
LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
LIS-Forum mailing list
LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
LIS-Forum mailing list
LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum
...
--
_______________________________________________
Search for products and services at:
http://search.mail.com
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
LIS-Forum mailing list
LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum
--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by *MailScanner* http://www.mailscanner.info/, and is
believed to be clean.
_______________________________________________
LIS-Forum mailing list
LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum
-- 
Dr Pawan Kumar Gupta
Rajasthan University Library
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg,
Jaipur - 302 055  INDIA
+91-141-2707866

-- 
Dr Pawan Kumar Gupta
Rajasthan University Library
Jawahar Lal Nehru Marg,
Jaipur - 302 055  INDIA
+91-141-2707866

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.