Hi Don, That would be great! Thanks. Based on some of the feedback I"m getting this time around, I'd say this effort is a go afterall. I'll be in touch about getting those records.
Lori P.S. I've been to your Kentucky campus....years ago for Ichthus. Small world. On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 5:23 AM, Don Butterworth < [email protected]> wrote: > Hello everyone, > > My name is Don Butterworth. I am the Head of Technical Services at Asbury > Theological Seminary and have been lurking on this list for the last couple > of months. Late last year our library migrated from Horizon to Symphony. > After having worked with the cataloging and acquisitions modules for over > six months, it is my personal opinion that our department's efficiency has > been reduced by at least 20%. Because of that, if I can convince the "powers > that be," I hope to set up an Evergreen test database here on campus, so > that we can get a feel for the software, workflow, and level of IT > involvement. Then, when the Acquisitions module is released in 2.0, > thoroughly test it to see if it is a viable alternative to Symphony. > > I have files of OCLC MARC records, for all of last year's acquisitions, > which I plan to import as our test database; about 10,000 records. If it is > legal, I believe I can convince our administration to contribute them to an > RSCEL training server, if that would be helpful. > > Don > > Don Butterworth > Faculty Associate / Librarian III > B.L. Fisher Library > Asbury Theological Seminary > [email protected] > (859) 858-2227 > > The opinions expressed are strictly my own and should not be considered as > any official opinion, endorsement or statement by Asbury Theological > Seminary. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Lori Bowen Ayre" <[email protected]> > To: "Evergreen Discussion Group" < > [email protected]> > Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 8:51:25 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern > Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] generic training server with predictable > data > > Oooooh. Like that suggestion. No reason we couldn't keep the same data > set on an available training server AND on as part of the Evergreen source. > > Lori > > On Mon, Jun 21, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Dan Scott <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Mon, 2010-06-21 at 17:09 -0700, Lori Bowen Ayre wrote: >> > Hi All, >> > >> > I posted info about this idea and got a big 'ol nothing in response so >> > I wanted to try one more time to verify that it really is of no >> > interest to anyone. >> >> It is of interest, I just have a slight variation on your suggestion >> which really hearkens back to a suggestion I pitched many moons ago. (I >> think the first time might have been >> http://markmail.org/message/dbwre7cqhmmnnlrv but I know I've discussed >> it in several other forums since then...) >> >> > Here's the idea....as one of the RSCEL projects, were thinking of >> > setting up a training server which would have a current version of >> > Evergreen loaded, would be accessible to anyone (much like the demo >> > servers) but we'd make sure we kept it totally current with one >> > matching client software download. >> > >> > >> > We'd also keep data in there that you could rely on being there for >> > training (so we'd have to refresh it on some regular basis). >> > Eventually, we'd contribute some exercises that people could use in >> > their training which would use that training server and data. >> > >> > >> > The idea is that you would then not have to worry about how to train >> > your people on your own Evergreen server at the same time you were >> > trying to get ready to go live. >> > >> > >> > Also, by sharing the same data and server set-up, we could all >> > contribute training exercises. >> > >> > >> > So, if you think this would be useful or you think it would be a waste >> > of time...please advise. Friendly amendments are also encouraged. We >> > want to do something that helps people so if this wouldn't help >> > anyone, we RSCELs will focus our attention somewhere else! >> > >> >> Rather than having this data sitting just on a training server RSCEL, I >> think it would be much more useful to have the sample data sets >> available as part of the Evergreen source. This would enable every >> Evergreen install to (optionally) have a reference set of data to work >> with locally. We could build documentation / training based on those >> sample sets of data, but also build tests on those sample sets of data >> to ensure that the SQL schema hasn't been broken & the data can actually >> load, a given server is working as expected, and that a given report >> returns the expected results, and that a given API call generates the >> expected effects. >> >> This could also be a useful basis on which to build tests of the >> migration scripts. >> >> I do think that having an up-to-date training server always at the ready >> would be a valuable thing and support that goal; I just think that it's >> potentially more important to have a canonical set of sample data >> available as part of the Evergreen source. >> >> >
