To second Jessamyn's note about forking the code -- IA converted the
original code from infogami [1] to be more in keeping with the IA
back-end process, so that the systems folks wouldn't have a less-known
system to try to keep up and running. I presume those changes are in the
github repo.
The original infogami version was quite neat - very flexible, everyone
could have their own display views, anyone could add data elements - but
probably wasn't sustainable for a large database. I think it's worth
looking at infogami, however, since some of the features that were lost
may be recoverable. I was quite fond of the use of templates, etc., that
inforgami had, but I think those have now been hard-coded.
If you want to see some of the earlier plans for OL, of course it's
available in the Wayback machine. You need to look prior to about May,
2010, such as
https://web.archive.org/web/20100310090438/http://openlibrary.org/
The developer docs there will look quite different from what you see
today, and of course the UI is totally different. However, at that time
the template system was live although not completely implemented.
My gut feeling is that the instructions at
http://code.openlibrary.org/en/latest/ may not be up to date, but if
folks are interesting in creating a version of OL we could ping the most
recent committer and find out exactly what state it is in.
kc
[1] http://infogami.org
On 6/8/15 10:41 AM, jessamyn c. west wrote:
You're more than welcome to fork the project, obviously, but I'm going
to put in the suggestion that IA get more proactive about pushing the
project so maybe we can have a "deadline to fork" if they don't get
more on board?
Because I think what we want ideally is not just the functionality of
Open Library code but having the existing infrastructure be supported
and maintained better, but I'm willing to try to have a conversation
about that with IA first if we think we can get some developers on
board to really dig into the code. I have a few wishlist things I'd
like to see happening that are mostly design-y in nature that would be
some good first steps, but some of the existing code base interacts
with code that is not open source on the Archive's servers (I think)
so just forking it won't give you a functional version of Open
Library. I'm not even sure from a structural perspective who can
commit code from within the current github repo (or if I'm even using
those words correctly)
________
Jessamyn
librarian.net ::: jessamyn.com ::: jessamyn.info ::: box 345, randolph vt 05060
On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 9:05 AM, todd.d.robb...@gmail.com
<todd.d.robb...@gmail.com> wrote:
Colby,
Let's jumpstart that movement by forking
https://github.com/internetarchive/openlibrary
On Sunday, June 7, 2015, Karen Coyle <kco...@kcoyle.net> wrote:
+1
On 6/7/15 8:25 AM, Colby Russell wrote:
On 06/06/2015 09:32 AM, jessamyn c. west wrote:
It's a thing that isn't built into the back end so they've been
reluctant to do it' but it's never a bad idea to ask again.
The Internet Archive/Open Library isn't pushing OL as an open source
project hard enough.
The Open Library should be at least as useful as IMDB is for films, but
it's not. Not having enough content is one thing. I can help fix that,
and would, but every time I have a go at editing, I run into not just
hurdles but full-on roadblocks of the sort we're already discussing
here. And that's been the case for years (both the existence of the
roadblocks and the ineffectual discussions around them).
It comes down to inadequacy of the code and the lack of direction in OL
as a project, every time.
The Internet Archive could put out a call that says, "Hey, we're really
looking for some help here", and it would reach the front page of HN
/tomorrow/ and the codebase would be teeming with attention. That
interest might wane. It almost definitely will. But OL should be able
to come out of it with at least half a dozen or so serious contributors
in the end, which in turn would allow an actual community of content
editors to form. It requires, though, that IA/OL position itself as
appearing interested in help, and that's not the case right now.
--
Colby Russell
_______________________________________________
Ol-discuss mailing list - Ol-discuss@archive.org
http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ol-discuss@archive.org/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
_______________________________________________
Ol-discuss mailing list - Ol-discuss@archive.org
http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ol-discuss@archive.org/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
--
Tod Robbins
Digital Asset Manager, MLIS
todrobbins.com | @todrobbins
_______________________________________________
Ol-discuss mailing list - Ol-discuss@archive.org
http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ol-discuss@archive.org/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
_______________________________________________
Ol-discuss mailing list - Ol-discuss@archive.org
http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ol-discuss@archive.org/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
--
Karen Coyle
kco...@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600
_______________________________________________
Ol-discuss mailing list - Ol-discuss@archive.org
http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ol-discuss@archive.org/
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to
ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
