> Here's an interesting article that just appeared in American Libraries that
> has some implications for Evergreen
> http://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2016/04/22/ebsco-kuali-open-source-project/

Other than them being completely wrong about Evergreen's technical
merits (for example, Equinox is doing multitenancy now via Sequoia),
more power to them.

There is most definitely competition between software products, but
open source software doesn't feel market pressures the way you might
think.  I mean, BSD is dead, but long live BSD!

Evergreen (and Koha's) main advantage is that the project is
responsive to its users, and it's been responsive in a relatively
organic way.  Any good ideas (and any good open source code) that
another product has, we can absorb if we really want to.  But we don't
_have_ to develop features if our user base doesn't need or want them.
And if something truly better does come along (and meets every need,
including the freedom to continue meeting the needs of its users),
then why not adopt it?  Or bounce between both, and aim for hybrid
vigor?  Competition is good.  Barring artificial intelligence, there's
never going to be one thing that will be everything to everyone.
There's room for Evergreen, Koha, and whatever else wants to solve a
problem (and there's FulfILLment to bind them all together;)

Jason Etheridge
| Community and Migration Manager
| Equinox Software - Open Your Library
| 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
| ja...@esilibrary.com
| http://www.esilibrary.com

Reply via email to