For proprietary software those sorts of groups exist and are called
"user's groups". :) Could have a somewhat different role with open
source software like Evergreen, but I still think you're essentially
talking about a user's group--I believe some of which are non-
profits. Calling it that might make it make immediate sense to
library world people.
Jonathan
On Aug 15, 2008, at 9:47 PM, Karen G. Schneider wrote:
Question: will the domain name, mailing lists, etc continue to be
owned by GPLS, or will it be taken over by Equinox (whois says
Equinox
registered evergreen-ils.org back in July, presumably to avoid the
curse of domain name squatters), or by some other entity? For the
paranoid amongst us, this is where an Evergreen Software
Foundation or
something like that could play a role. I'm not worried, personally,
but we should be clear about changes that might have side effects
beyond just the name.
I raise my hand and say I did it, and also quickly add that as you
suggest, it was to avoid domain squatting. That said, I quickly
turned it
over to Equinox (in case I got hit by a truck) and at that, we're all
aware that the domain names should really be in the name of a separate
entity for Evergreen. Currently they are here and there.
Actually I would say that many people involved in Evergreen
(including and
even particularly Equinox) are in favor of establishing an entity for
Evergreen.
I will be frank and say that when I came on board with Equinox --
well,
actually well before this -- I kept hearing talk of a "foundation" for
Evergreen and I thought, well maybe. But after a while I realized that
people were saying "foundation" (which made me think the focus was on
soliciting funds--not a bad idea but a not well-gelled) when what I
/think/ they mean is nonprofit organization (as in a legal entity
specific
to Evergreen, which could in fact be used for fundraising, which is
a very
different emphasis). This is a very sound idea.
I have been (partly) down this road in another life and have some
sense of
the nonprofit landscape. I also have a lot of familiarity (actually
too
much) with managing a project that had no legal status, and I have
peers
(even two in the OSS world) in a similar position. Once a project
achieves
a certain age and size, it is much, much better for everyone
concerned if
it has its own legal identity.
I have certainly seen changes happen -- sometimes overnight -- that
have
adversely affected a project that really should have had its own
destiny.
Even when all the principals are fully on board -- and I think I
can say
in all sincerity that is completely true with Evergreen -- things
happen.
As Joan Didion wrote, "Life changes in the instant." In my
experience, it
takes longer to get a nonprofit established than it does for most
of these
changes to take place.
I have never actually brought a nonprofit to fruition, though I
came very
close and have spent a lot of time reading up on them, attending
nonprof
conferences, etc. I know enough to believe nonprofit status is a very
rational path for Evergreen and would be willing to help make this
happen
(in fact, uh, I bet there are some people, including my boss, who
actually
consider this part of my job...). I also think some of our
stakeholders
are similarly interested and would be willing to work to help
establish
this entity.
Karen G. Schneider
Equinox Community Librarian
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
