<html>
<body>
At 01:02 PM 5/31/2013 -0400, Kyle Hall wrote (and maybe some attributions
got lost):<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite>[snip]<br>
Agreed. Most plugin logic would make for a very good basis for an Koha
patch. [snip]<br>
<dl><br>
<dd>I'm getting a bit of a twitch here -- I see the utility of this as
a<br>
<dd>workaround, but I hope that this plugin has a very short life
on<br>
<dd>account of the underlying bugs getting fixed.<br>
</dl><br>
Agreed. This utility is a workaround for an as-of-yet unidentified bug.
[snip]<br><br>
If I had known this would be of interest to more users, I would have
started with a patch instead of a plugin. I'd be more than happy to
patch-ify this plugin when I have the time. [snip]</blockquote><br>
Tarballs, packages, gits (including vendors), stables, latest, bugs and
patches, wikis (various), tools, reports, live-DVDs, mailing lists, chat,
maybe more, and now plug-ins? Could we please look at what the
"open source" world is doing? Apache, SendMail, Perl, PostFix,
FireFox, Debian, Ubuntu, OpenOffice, LibreOffice ... are fairly stable
with an established security update capability. Even Java and MySQL are
simplifying.<br><br>
I had a "rather important" librarian from Quebec drop in, out
of the blue, yesterday to talk about Koha. Her group (37 libraries) had
previously been burned by a trial commercial implementation of Koha (no
need to quote names), so they're using Opals, but "liked the
idea" of Koha. First question: "stability?"<br><br>
She was well aware that we announce on our OPAC: "System change /
Koha v3.8.4 on line 14 September 2012" (I think that was fairly
timely) so she asked about 3.10 and 3.12; my answer "we're happy;
two year cycle; look at it again in September 2014."<br><br>
I know that a number of you will ... whatever ... Paul's a pain in the
neck, doesn't understand, does his own thing, but the bottom line is that
<<a href="http://opac.navalmarinearchive.com/" eudora="autourl">http://opac.navalmarinearchive.com/</a>>
is fully functional and is intrinsically Koha. It's (reasonably) secure
(without https) and meets the needs of our users and librarians. It runs
itself with minimal ( < 1 hour/week statistically ) intervention by IT
personnel. <br><br>
There are very few institutions that have "happiness" in the
form of unlimited budgets and unlimited IT departments. I'm personally
intrigued by the creativity of the Koha community, so try and follow
what's happening -- which is magnificent -- but doubt that your average
library has the same passion.<br><br>
Koha needs the credibility and stability of a *system*, install, forget
(except security), and put on your two-three year review list.<br><br>
</rant><br><br>
Most respectfully, after nearly three years of getting to "know
Koha" and some of the dedicated people involved,<br>
Paul<br><br>
<br>
<x-sigsep><p></x-sigsep>
---<br>
Maritime heritage and history, preservation and conservation, <br>
research and education through the written word and the arts.<br>
<<a href="http://navalmarinearchive.com/" eudora="autourl">http://NavalMarineArchive.com</a>>
and
<<a href="http://ultramarine.ca/" eudora="autourl">http://UltraMarine.ca</a>><br>
</body>
</html>