I want to add to Stevan's remark that the free availability of many different software for self-archiving is intended to boost the OA movement, not to slow it down ! And if CERN has also released last year its document server as GNU (from <http://cdsware.cern.ch>), it is with the idea that it may fit well the needs of some large institutions willing to start self archiving in a similar way as it is done at CERN - and not at all to compete with eprints.org.
I do hope that more and more OAI-compliant software will emerge in the coming years and that they will offer a large range of solutions among which institutions can freely choose ! JY Le Meur. CERN Document Server Project Leader ** <http://cds.cern.ch/> ** <[email protected]> Room: Bldg 510-1-011 ** Voice: +41-22-7674745 ** Fax: +41-22-7678142 On Tue, 11 Feb 2003, Stevan Harnad wrote: > It is rather ironic that a choice between two free self-archiving > softwares should lately be holding up self-archiving! > > "Should I use http://www.eprints.org/ or http://www.dspace.org/ > as my Institutional Self-Archiving Software? > > The short answer is: It doesn't matter! Use either one! > > EPrints and DSpace are both free, both open-source, both OAI-compliant, > both interoperable, both equivalent in the functionality relevant to > self-archiving, and even both written initially by the same programmer > (Southampton's Rob Tansley)! > > The two free software packages are of comparable > complexity, both built using established technologies. So > choose one http://software.eprints.org/#sites or the other > http://dspace.org/people/early-adopt.html and start self-archiving! > (And if you should change your mind about the software, you can switch > and migrate your archive's content from one to the other later.) > > Because the real 1st, 2nd, and 3rd priority today is not > software-choice but *content*: *filling* those institutional > archives as soon as possible with all your institution's refereed > research output, so as to maximise its potential research impact > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/unto-others.html -- which > is otherwise being needlessly lost, daily. > > Thus the only option to be avoided at all costs is "ESpace": an > empty or non-existent institutional archive! The best way to > ensure the filling of your institutional refereed research > archives is to adopt an institutional self-archiving policy > http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/#institution-facilitate-filling such > as http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lac/archpol.html or even a national one: > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/Ariadne-RAE.doc > > The California Institute of Technology http://library.caltech.edu/digital/ > is developing an institutional self-archiving strategy > for its Caltech Collection of Open Digital Archives (CODA) > -- a strategy other institutions may find worth emulating > http://library.caltech.edu/evdv/CODA.ppt > > So please do take your choice of the two free softwares; the differences > are trivial. And then get on to the far more important part: Filling > those archives, by self-archiving all your institutional research output! > > Stevan Harnad > > NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing open > access to the peer-reviewed research literature online is available at > the American Scientist September Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01 & 02): > > > http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Forum.html > or > http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/index.html > > Discussion can be posted to: [email protected] > > See also the Budapest Open Access Initiative: > http://www.soros.org/openaccess > > the Free Online Scholarship Movement: > http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm > > the OAI site: > http://www.openarchives.org > > and the self-archiving FAQ: > http://www.eprints.org/self-faq/ >
