Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Return of the Evergreen Newsletter
Or added to the post-subscribe welcome message. Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device-- On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:07 PM, Jason Etheridge ja...@esilibrary.com wrote: though maybe it could be subsumed by a recurring blurb in the newsletter.
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Return of the Evergreen Newsletter
Jason, If we could incorporate the Communication Guidelines that the Web Team came up with to the monthly welcome message, that would be very useful. Could it go out automatically? Lori On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 7:06 PM, Jason Etheridge ja...@esilibrary.comwrote: I volunteered to pull the newsletter together each month and will be looking to each of you to keep me in the Evergreen news. Once compiled, I’ll create a space on the Evergreen wiki each month and email you all with the link. Yay! Amy++ Something else I saw recently digging through old email; we used to do a monthly welcome email on the list, reiterating the purpose the list, etc. If anyone wants to volunteer for reviving that, it'd probably be a good thing, though maybe it could be subsumed by a recurring blurb in the newsletter. -- Jason Etheridge | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: ja...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com | Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org http://evergreen-ils.org
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
+1 Quoting Justin Hopkins jus...@mobiusconsortium.org: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it sysads - should we create the missing list? Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device-- -- Rogan Hamby Manager Rock Hill Library Reference Services York County Library System Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?
I heartily concur. -Vicki On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it sysads - should we create the missing list? Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device-- -- Victoria Bush Opscan Evaluation Manager CTLT vb...@ilstu.edu
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?
+1 Sent from my iPad On May 1, 2012, at 9:22 AM, Victoria Bush vb...@ilstu.edumailto:vb...@ilstu.edu wrote: I heartily concur. -Vicki On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it sysads - should we create the missing list? Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device-- -- Victoria Bush Opscan Evaluation Manager CTLT vb...@ilstu.edumailto:vb...@ilstu.edu
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Recording of Update from Evergreen Oversight Board and Update from Developers
I tend to think that everyone attending a public function should expect to be recorded but I don't know what Indiana's laws may be. I think your approach is reasonable Dan. +1 Quoting Dan Scott d...@coffeecode.net: Hi folks: Those of you who made it to Saturday's early-morning update sessions may or may not have noticed the small black ball with the glowing red light on one of the front tables near the projector. That was my microphone, set up to capture the audio from the update sessions in the morning. I did make an announcement at the start of the Update from the Evergreen Oversight Board meeting that the sessions were being recorded, but there were many people who filed in after that point in time who might not have been aware that the session was being recorded. And, as the visioning exercise that Lori led went on, it's quite possible that people would have forgotten about the ongoing recording. So - while I would like to make the recordings available so that those who weren't there would be able to catch up, I'm hesitant to release the visioning exercise / discussion section of the Oversight Board meeting because I don't think we have explicit consent from everyone who participated. Therefore, I'm proposing that I upload the two update sessions, sans the intermediate discussion section. Can I get a +1/-1 on that? Thanks, Dan P.S. A takeaway for future conferences might be that we should have a sessions might be recorded with audio and/or video blanket notice posted signage? -- Rogan Hamby Manager Rock Hill Library Reference Services York County Library System Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read. - Groucho Marx
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Return of the Evergreen Newsletter
If we could incorporate the Communication Guidelines that the Web Team came up with to the monthly welcome message, that would be very useful. Could it go out automatically? We can automate just about anything. :) -- Jason Etheridge | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: ja...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com | Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org http://evergreen-ils.org
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?
Yes, this is an excellent idea. Alexey Lazar PALS Information System Developer and Integrator 507-389-2907 http://www.mnpals.org/ On Apr 30, 2012, at 20:11 , Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it sysads - should we create the missing list? Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device--
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues
One thing we'd like to see improved with the current workflow http://goo.gl/5AhcP is an option for more streamlined electronic orders (e.g. When Provider accepts electronic orders = yes). The basic use case is where electronic orders are accepted but not via EDI -- instead, just classic credit card order via direct web through sites like Amazon and so on. This is partly a documentation issue (not clear what to do as you walk through this use case for the first time since Yes above points to EDI only in the workflow diagram) but there probably could be some UI improvements to streamline cases where you are working via online web orders and get immediate feedback about order and shipping status and don't need to print or send out a purchase order, etc. George George Duimovich NRCan Library / Bibliothèque de RNCan -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Lussier Sent: April 30, 2012 17:13 To: open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues Hi all, I'm taking this opportunity to be loud on a couple of acquisitions problems we've encountered. We have two consortia that are going live on Evergreen in less than a month. This morning, I sat down with the acq people at one consortium to identify the issues that will be most problematic for them when they go live. I'm hoping we can work to get these issues resolved so that the transition to acquisitions in Evergreen can go as smoothly as possible. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/969494 describes a problem where using the Add to Purchase Order option from the View/Place Orders interface does not carry over the PO's provider to that lineitem. Consequently, the PO cannot be activated. We have several libraries who do not plan to use selection lists, and fixing this problem will make a big difference in their workflow. * I also added a new bug today for problems we encountered when trying to activate a PO as part of the order record upload process. https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/992108. Since the workaround for this isn't too onerous (uploading directly to the PO and then activating), it probably isn't as high of a priority as my first item, but it is still fairly important. * We also are having ongoing problems with EDI order responses. From the acquisitions discussion Saturday morning, it sounds like nobody is working with order responses. We are committed to putting in some of the legwork to try to figure out what the problems are and to get order responses working properly so that acquisitions can become a more attractive option for other Evergreen users. However, we have encountered some problems that I suspect might not be bugs, but may be related to configuration issues, and we just need to know where to start looking to resolve these problems. I sent something to the list regarding this issue earlier this month, http://markmail.org/message/gjn4eiadi7s55jdt, but I'll try to provide more detail below. We have been working with a vendor that has been posting test order responses. We have been able to successfully translate these order responses two times, and both times occurred on the day after we performed an Evergreen update on our test system. Afterwards, we get an error in our EDI messages every day. It seems as if the system keeps trying to translate that same message that had already been successfully translated after our Evergreen update. The status of these messages is trans_error. The error message is: EDI Translator edi2json failed, Error 2: Uncaught exception Input/output error in method edi2json The EDI Message Body is: UNB+UNOA:3+1697978:31B+3075052:31B+120328:1751+11++EANCOM'UNG+ORDRSP+1697978:31B+3075052:31B+120328:1751+07+UN+D:96A'UNH+07+ORDRSP:D:96A:UN:EAN008'BGM+231+148+29'DTM+137:20120313:102'RFF+ON:148'NAD+BY+20N6885::91'NAD+SU+1697978::31B'LIN+166+5+9780060186944:EN'PIA+5+0060186941:IB'QTY+21:1'PRI+AAF:22:CA:SRP'RFF+LI:148/166'LIN+167+5+9780142437261:EN'PIA+5+0142437263:IB'QTY+21:1'PRI+AAF:7:CA:SRP'RFF+LI:148/167'LIN+168+5+9780152052201:EN'PIA+5+0152052208:IB'QTY+21:3'PRI+AAF:6.95:CA:SRP'RFF+LI:148/168'LIN+169+2+:EN'PIA+5+:IB'QTY+21:1'QTY+12:0'FTX+LIN++200:1B:28'PRI+AAF:5:CA:SRP'RFF+LI:148/169'LIN+170+5+9780345475800:EN'PIA+5+0345475801:IB'QTY+21:1'PRI+AAF:14.95:CA:SRP'RFF+LI:148/170'UNS+S'CNT+2:5'UNT+36+07'UNE+1+07'UNZ+1+11' Any thoughts on where we can start troubleshooting this? Thanks! Kathy -- Kathy Lussier Project Coordinator Massachusetts Library Network Cooperative (508) 756-0172 (508) 755-3721 (fax) kluss...@masslnc.org Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/kmlussier
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
I also think it's a great idea. J Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich May 1, 2012 10:12 AM Yes, this is an excellent idea. Alexey LazarPALSInformation System Developer and Integrator507-389-2907http://www.mnpals.org/ Justin Hopkins April 30, 2012 8:11 PM We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training,which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of anew discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration.I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this groupis any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systemsadministration (troubleshooting server config issues,installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning,network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be anarea that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great helpon those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's faceit - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers.I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest thatsomeone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear itsysads - should we create the "missing list"?Regards,Justin HopkinsCoordinator, IT Web ServicesMOBIUS Consortium Officec: 573-808-2309--sent from a mobile device-- -- John Houser Technology Coordinator HSLC 215-534-6820 hou...@hslc.org
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues
George, I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The workflow diagram says that if you are not ordering through EDI, print the order. If I understand you correctly, you may have a situation where you orderd on Amazon but you will also be maintaining a separate record in Evergreen Acquisitions and simply never print a purchase order because Amazon would not accept it. Is that correct? Tim On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Duimovich, George george.duimov...@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca wrote: One thing we'd like to see improved with the current workflow http://goo.gl/5AhcP is an option for more streamlined electronic orders (e.g. When Provider accepts electronic orders = yes). The basic use case is where electronic orders are accepted but not via EDI -- instead, just classic credit card order via direct web through sites like Amazon and so on. This is partly a documentation issue (not clear what to do as you walk through this use case for the first time since Yes above points to EDI only in the workflow diagram) but there probably could be some UI improvements to streamline cases where you are working via online web orders and get immediate feedback about order and shipping status and don't need to print or send out a purchase order, etc. George George Duimovich NRCan Library / Bibliothèque de RNCan -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Lussier Sent: April 30, 2012 17:13 To: open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues Hi all, I'm taking this opportunity to be loud on a couple of acquisitions problems we've encountered. We have two consortia that are going live on Evergreen in less than a month. This morning, I sat down with the acq people at one consortium to identify the issues that will be most problematic for them when they go live. I'm hoping we can work to get these issues resolved so that the transition to acquisitions in Evergreen can go as smoothly as possible. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/969494 describes a problem where using the Add to Purchase Order option from the View/Place Orders interface does not carry over the PO's provider to that lineitem. Consequently, the PO cannot be activated. We have several libraries who do not plan to use selection lists, and fixing this problem will make a big difference in their workflow. * I also added a new bug today for problems we encountered when trying to activate a PO as part of the order record upload process. https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/992108. Since the workaround for this isn't too onerous (uploading directly to the PO and then activating), it probably isn't as high of a priority as my first item, but it is still fairly important. * We also are having ongoing problems with EDI order responses. From the acquisitions discussion Saturday morning, it sounds like nobody is working with order responses. We are committed to putting in some of the legwork to try to figure out what the problems are and to get order responses working properly so that acquisitions can become a more attractive option for other Evergreen users. However, we have encountered some problems that I suspect might not be bugs, but may be related to configuration issues, and we just need to know where to start looking to resolve these problems. I sent something to the list regarding this issue earlier this month, http://markmail.org/message/gjn4eiadi7s55jdt, but I'll try to provide more detail below. We have been working with a vendor that has been posting test order responses. We have been able to successfully translate these order responses two times, and both times occurred on the day after we performed an Evergreen update on our test system. Afterwards, we get an error in our EDI messages every day. It seems as if the system keeps trying to translate that same message that had already been successfully translated after our Evergreen update. The status of these messages is trans_error. The error message is: EDI Translator edi2json failed, Error 2: Uncaught exception Input/output error in method edi2json The EDI Message Body is:
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues
Hello Tim, Correct. Just trying to capture some essential purchase details in more streamlined way. George From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Tim Spindler Sent: May 1, 2012 10:34 To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues George, I'm not sure I understand what you are saying. The workflow diagram says that if you are not ordering through EDI, print the order. If I understand you correctly, you may have a situation where you orderd on Amazon but you will also be maintaining a separate record in Evergreen Acquisitions and simply never print a purchase order because Amazon would not accept it. Is that correct? Tim On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Duimovich, George george.duimov...@nrcan-rncan.gc.camailto:george.duimov...@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca wrote: One thing we'd like to see improved with the current workflow http://goo.gl/5AhcP is an option for more streamlined electronic orders (e.g. When Provider accepts electronic orders = yes). The basic use case is where electronic orders are accepted but not via EDI -- instead, just classic credit card order via direct web through sites like Amazon and so on. This is partly a documentation issue (not clear what to do as you walk through this use case for the first time since Yes above points to EDI only in the workflow diagram) but there probably could be some UI improvements to streamline cases where you are working via online web orders and get immediate feedback about order and shipping status and don't need to print or send out a purchase order, etc. George George Duimovich NRCan Library / Bibliothèque de RNCan -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.orgmailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.orgmailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Kathy Lussier Sent: April 30, 2012 17:13 To: open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.orgmailto:open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Acquisitions issues Hi all, I'm taking this opportunity to be loud on a couple of acquisitions problems we've encountered. We have two consortia that are going live on Evergreen in less than a month. This morning, I sat down with the acq people at one consortium to identify the issues that will be most problematic for them when they go live. I'm hoping we can work to get these issues resolved so that the transition to acquisitions in Evergreen can go as smoothly as possible. * https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/969494 describes a problem where using the Add to Purchase Order option from the View/Place Orders interface does not carry over the PO's provider to that lineitem. Consequently, the PO cannot be activated. We have several libraries who do not plan to use selection lists, and fixing this problem will make a big difference in their workflow. * I also added a new bug today for problems we encountered when trying to activate a PO as part of the order record upload process. https://bugs.launchpad.net/evergreen/+bug/992108. Since the workaround for this isn't too onerous (uploading directly to the PO and then activating), it probably isn't as high of a priority as my first item, but it is still fairly important. * We also are having ongoing problems with EDI order responses. From the acquisitions discussion Saturday morning, it sounds like nobody is working with order responses. We are committed to putting in some of the legwork to try to figure out what the problems are and to get order responses working properly so that acquisitions can become a more attractive option for other Evergreen users. However, we have encountered some problems that I suspect might not be bugs, but may be related to configuration issues, and we just need to know where to start looking to resolve these problems. I sent something to the list regarding this issue earlier this month, http://markmail.org/message/gjn4eiadi7s55jdt, but I'll try to provide more detail below. We have been working with a vendor that has been posting test order responses. We have been able to successfully translate these order responses two times, and both times occurred on the day after we performed an Evergreen update on our test system. Afterwards, we get an error in our EDI messages every day. It seems as if the system keeps trying to translate that same message that had already been successfully translated after our Evergreen update. The status of these messages is trans_error. The error message is: EDI Translator edi2json failed, Error 2: Uncaught exception Input/output error in method edi2json The EDI Message Body is:
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?
Yes! Martha Driscoll Systems Manager North of Boston Library Exchange Danvers, Massachusetts www.noblenet.org On 4/30/2012 8:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it sysads - should we create the missing list? Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device--
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Fwd: Acquisitions issues (Sitka)
Hi Sharon, Thanks for bringing this discussion to the mailing list. Regarding the items on your top ten list, I will offer my input on how development can address these issues in the related LaunchPad bug for each one (or create a new bug where there isn't already one for an issue) over the next little while. Of your two biggest issues, the slow response time is pretty self explanatory, but as to the workflow, I would recommend that the discussion continue right here on the mailing list about what exactly must change about the workflow, to the extent that those changes are not already covered in your top ten list. My thanks to you, to Jennifer Pringle, Megan Maurer, Tara Robertson, and to everyone else helping to communicate the needs of Acq folks in general to the development community. Lebbeous On 04/30/2012 06:45 PM, Sharon Herbert (Project Sitka) wrote: And here's the attachment with our Top 10 list - Forwarded message from sherb...@sitka.bclibraries.ca - Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 15:44:29 -0700 From: Sharon Herbert (Project Sitka) sherb...@sitka.bclibraries.ca Reply-To: Sharon Herbert (Project Sitka) sherb...@sitka.bclibraries.ca Subject: Acquisitions issues (Sitka) To: open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org Thanks Kathy for keeping the great conversation from the conference going on the list. I hope that the developers won't regret asking us to make some noise ;) I'm hoping that we can find some areas of consensus with all of our top issues lists. I've attached Sitka's top 10 development/bug fix requests, which was compiled by Jennifer Pringle, our Acquisitions lead for Sitka support; I shared our top 5 at Megan Maurer's Acquisitions session on Friday. Our development list is based on the experience of running Acquisitions live on production for 6 sites, including a large 15-branch system that has been using EG Acquisitions since September. I've included the Launchpad numbers for the top 5. As Tara Robertson has already explained, our biggest issues in using Acquisitions on production are the workflow and very slow response time around purchase order handling. These two issues are inextricably linked: 1.Ability to Batch Link Line Items to Invoices – LP #985308 Scenario: -Library receives a shipments of items from a provider that does not use EDI. The invoice for this shipment contains 4 items from purchase order A, 3 items from purchase order B, 12 items from purchase order C, 7 items from purchase order D and 2 items from purchase order E. Each of these purchase orders also contain line items still waiting to be shipped that will appear on a different invoice. -To create an invoice for these items the user must individually link each of the 28 line items from their purchase orders to this invoice. Solution: Have a function that allows a user select a number of line items on a purchase order using the tick box and then batch link the items to an invoice through the main Actions menu. Similar functionality currently exists for deleting line items, updating funds on line items, and cancelling line items. 2. Purchase Order and Invoice slowness – LP #985295 Large purchase orders are consistently slow to open. A very large purchase order of 382 line items (a hotlist from a vendor) takes over 4 minutes to load. During that time the staff client stops responding and no tasks can be performed in Evergreen until the purchase order has fully loaded. This is particularly a problem when users are linking line items from a purchase order to an invoice. Line items are linked individually from a purchase order to an invoice and the invoice opens in the same tab as the purchase order. Users have to re-open the purchase order for every line item they wish to link to the invoice. Large invoices result in an unresponsive script warning. You are able to continue loading the invoice by clicking Continue. Finally, a significant issue that hasn't made it into our top 10 list, but might be low-hanging fruit, is the extremely small 8 point font size across Acquisitions. Very challenging for aging eyes when you are working in Acq all day. Looking forward to working with other libraries using or planning to use Acquisitions. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Thanks, Sharon -- Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley | Software Developer | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: lebbe...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
I'm -1 to this proposal. For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas for discussion. The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me a few years ago, I would have said yes. But here are some potential concerns I have now: While our role within our organizations may be to find the best practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to play in Evergreen's overall development. As system administrators, we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field. We can provide invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC. Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more information can become lost between groups if people do not subscribe to every list. While of course, many of us would likely be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists. Like say for example: John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the sys admin list. But it turns out to be an actual issue with the Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it fixed for everyone in the community. Do we then have to take the originally reported issue from the sys admin list and forward it to the dev list and discuss solutions? The extra time and potential for lost information/facts gives me concerns that having that extra layer of communication may prove unwieldy. Alternatively, what if someone posted a question to both mailing lists (sys admin and dev) and different people respond on each thread (based on whichever list they were subscribed) and the conversation becomes fractured between two lists? How does everything get put back together in a nice ordered way for the next generation of users searching for information / learning. To summarize, in my opinion, the system administrators while definitely having their own set of issues and topics of discussion are still a core part of the overall Evergreen development community and we should participate using the same areas for discussion such as the dev mailing list and IRC so that we don't miss anything or leave anything out of the mainstream Evergreen community. The main thing I would want to change at this point in time is perhaps the wording used to describe the dev mailing list to expand beyond just technical code/patches, but to be a broader description and reinforce the technical discussion list title. Unless of course, the developers tell us that they'd prefer to keep that list to talking only about real development only... ;) -- Ben On 4/30/2012 8:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone (Chris Sharp?) could create such a list. So let's hear it sysads - should we create the missing list? Regards, Justin Hopkins Coordinator, IT Web Services MOBIUS Consortium Office c: 573-808-2309 --sent from a mobile device-- -- Benjamin Shum Open Source Software Coordinator Bibliomation, Inc. 32 Crest Road Middlebury, CT 06762 203-577-4070, ext. 113
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
-1 I want to show a little solidarity with Ben on this issue, admitting up front that I'm not in practice the sysadmin of any Evergreen site. It's absolutely great for the sysadmin community to communicate and share more; that will be only a win for the project in general whether you do it in your own mailing list or on the general one. It's the siloing of our community that I worry about. Dan Scott and I seemed to be successful in talking the Acq group out of starting a new list the conference, and there are a few other folks (including non developers) who spoke about intracommunity communications. I can't recall who right now (but thank you!). I think the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing in our community is a problem sometimes, but it's one we should be able to fix. I'll be making more of an effort on my part to ensure that development isn't going on in the dark. This isn't a bitter -1, and if you do create a new sysadmin list, more power to all of you. Sharing information and ideas is what's most important here. Lebbeous On 05/01/2012 12:14 PM, Ben Shum wrote: I'm -1 to this proposal. For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas for discussion. The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me a few years ago, I would have said yes. But here are some potential concerns I have now: While our role within our organizations may be to find the best practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to play in Evergreen's overall development. As system administrators, we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field. We can provide invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC. Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more information can become lost between groups if people do not subscribe to every list. While of course, many of us would likely be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists. Like say for example: John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the sys admin list. But it turns out to be an actual issue with the Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it fixed for everyone in the community. Do we then have to take the originally reported issue from the sys admin list and forward it to the dev list and discuss solutions? The extra time and potential for lost information/facts gives me concerns that having that extra layer of communication may prove unwieldy. Alternatively, what if someone posted a question to both mailing lists (sys admin and dev) and different people respond on each thread (based on whichever list they were subscribed) and the conversation becomes fractured between two lists? How does everything get put back together in a nice ordered way for the next generation of users searching for information / learning. To summarize, in my opinion, the system administrators while definitely having their own set of issues and topics of discussion are still a core part of the overall Evergreen development community and we should participate using the same areas for discussion such as the dev mailing list and IRC so that we don't miss anything or leave anything out of the mainstream Evergreen community. The main thing I would want to change at this point in time is perhaps the wording used to describe the dev mailing list to expand beyond just technical code/patches, but to be a broader description and reinforce the technical discussion list title. Unless of course, the developers tell us that they'd prefer to keep that list to talking only about real development only... ;) -- Ben On 4/30/2012 8:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it - IRC is and probably always will be the domain of developers. I'm hoping that if enough people on this list express an interest that someone
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?
I agree with Ben. Obviously, if a certain community sub-group decides it wants to create their own mailing list, there is no Evergreen police to stop you, but I think doing so is a mistake. One of the strengths of the Evergreen community that I think we've worked at is the lack of formal boundaries between our stakeholder groups. This isn't a proprietary system where the developers are locked in a dungeon and you must speak through Swiss intermediaries. We're also a relatively small group and I think the last thing we should be doing is splitting our forces. I suggest keeping it together and using subject lines effectively. So, I agree with Ben's thoughts. I just saw Lebbeous's email and I agree with his points as well. --- W. Brad LaJeunesse | President | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: b...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Ben Shum Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:15 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list? I'm -1 to this proposal. For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas for discussion. The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me a few years ago, I would have said yes. But here are some potential concerns I have now: While our role within our organizations may be to find the best practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to play in Evergreen's overall development. As system administrators, we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field. We can provide invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC. Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more information can become lost between groups if people do not subscribe to every list. While of course, many of us would likely be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists. Like say for example: John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the sys admin list. But it turns out to be an actual issue with the Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it fixed for everyone in the community. Do we then have to take the originally reported issue from the sys admin list and forward it to the dev list and discuss solutions? The extra time and potential for lost information/facts gives me concerns that having that extra layer of communication may prove unwieldy. Alternatively, what if someone posted a question to both mailing lists (sys admin and dev) and different people respond on each thread (based on whichever list they were subscribed) and the conversation becomes fractured between two lists? How does everything get put back together in a nice ordered way for the next generation of users searching for information / learning. To summarize, in my opinion, the system administrators while definitely having their own set of issues and topics of discussion are still a core part of the overall Evergreen development community and we should participate using the same areas for discussion such as the dev mailing list and IRC so that we don't miss anything or leave anything out of the mainstream Evergreen community. The main thing I would want to change at this point in time is perhaps the wording used to describe the dev mailing list to expand beyond just technical code/patches, but to be a broader description and reinforce the technical discussion list title. Unless of course, the developers tell us that they'd prefer to keep that list to talking only about real development only... ;) -- Ben On 4/30/2012 8:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up the post-conference systems administrator training, which was awesome. Afterwards we were talking about the utility of a new discussion list focused on Evergreen systems administration. I think the topic is deep enough to warrant a list, and if this group is any indication there is also sufficient interest. Systems administration (troubleshooting server config issues, installing/setting up Evergreen, using git, performance tuning, network issues, cluster configuration, security, etc) seems to be an area that deserves it's own forum. I've received plenty of great help on those topics in IRC, which I'm very appreciative of, but let's face it
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] version and serials
Hi, For folks using serials, what version are you on 2.1.? Is there anyone using serials on 2.0.2? In chatting with people at the conference I recall that Mieke and Dan S's libraries are using serials and on a newer version than 2.0.x. Does that mean that there are significant issues using serials on 2.0? We have a staff meeting today and I'm figuring out my work plan for the summer and am trying to figure out if we need to wait until Sitka upgrades before I can make headway with serials. Thanks, Tara
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] version and serials
Hi Tara, I think the best way to answer your question would be to direct you to the serials section of the 2.1 release notes for what is effectively a list of features you'll be missing. http://open-ils.org/documentation/release/RELEASE_NOTES_2_1_0.html#_serials_enhancements The list of new features in 2.2 over 2.1 is rather smaller. 2.0 will work, but the document linked gives you some idea of where the limitations will be. Hope this helps, Lebbeous On 05/01/2012 01:20 PM, Tara Robertson wrote: Hi, For folks using serials, what version are you on 2.1.? Is there anyone using serials on 2.0.2? In chatting with people at the conference I recall that Mieke and Dan S's libraries are using serials and on a newer version than 2.0.x. Does that mean that there are significant issues using serials on 2.0? We have a staff meeting today and I'm figuring out my work plan for the summer and am trying to figure out if we need to wait until Sitka upgrades before I can make headway with serials. Thanks, Tara -- Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley | Software Developer | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: lebbe...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
Personally, I didn't envision a sys-admin group as a siloing but as an opportunity for sys-admins to work on best practices and things that may be redundant or repetitive on the dev list. I can easily see conversations about how do we maintain 2.1 because we don't want to upgrade to 2.2 and are there selective patches we can use, etc which are the kinds of conversations we don't see a lot of now. If the practice were to fork the community rather than grow the dialogues, which is to say, take away from dev useful conversations about how and why that inform development then I would be -1. Quoting W. Brad LaJeunesse b...@esilibrary.com: I agree with Ben. Obviously, if a certain community sub-group decides it wants to create their own mailing list, there is no Evergreen police to stop you, but I think doing so is a mistake. One of the strengths of the Evergreen community that I think we've worked at is the lack of formal boundaries between our stakeholder groups. This isn't a proprietary system where the developers are locked in a dungeon and you must speak through Swiss intermediaries. We're also a relatively small group and I think the last thing we should be doing is splitting our forces. I suggest keeping it together and using subject lines effectively. So, I agree with Ben's thoughts. I just saw Lebbeous's email and I agree with his points as well. --- W. Brad LaJeunesse | President | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: b...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Ben Shum Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:15 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list? I'm -1 to this proposal. For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas for discussion. The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me a few years ago, I would have said yes. But here are some potential concerns I have now: While our role within our organizations may be to find the best practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to play in Evergreen's overall development. As system administrators, we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field. We can provide invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC. Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more information can become lost between groups if people do not subscribe to every list. While of course, many of us would likely be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists. Like say for example: John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the sys admin list. But it turns out to be an actual issue with the Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it fixed for everyone in the community. Do we then have to take the originally reported issue from the sys admin list and forward it to the dev list and discuss solutions? The extra time and potential for lost information/facts gives me concerns that having that extra layer of communication may prove unwieldy. Alternatively, what if someone posted a question to both mailing lists (sys admin and dev) and different people respond on each thread (based on whichever list they were subscribed) and the conversation becomes fractured between two lists? How does everything get put back together in a nice ordered way for the next generation of users searching for information / learning. To summarize, in my opinion, the system administrators while definitely having their own set of issues and topics of discussion are still a core part of the overall Evergreen development community and we should participate using the same areas for discussion such as the dev mailing list and IRC so that we don't miss anything or leave anything out of the mainstream Evergreen community. The main thing I would want to change at this point in time is perhaps the wording used to describe the dev mailing list to expand beyond just technical code/patches, but to be a broader description and reinforce the technical discussion list title. Unless of course, the developers tell us that they'd prefer to keep that list to talking only about real development only... ;) -- Ben On 4/30/2012 8:11 PM, Justin Hopkins wrote: We just wrapped up
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] version and serials
Hi Lebbeous, Thanks for your quick reply. Looking at the 2.0 release notes I don't see much fleshed out about serials: http://open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=feature_list_2_0 I'm wondering if there's anyone who's actually using serials on a 2.0 release. I haven't been able to successfully set things up so that they work. By work I mean have the next issuance predict correctly. It's been awhile since I've put time into figuring out serials. I have Mieke's patterns (thanks again!) and will try again with the documentation. I'm not sure if the problem is my understanding (entirely possible), the documentation (seems less possible) or if the 2.0.2 version, that Sitka is running, or how Sitka has things configured. We are the only site on Sitka who is really keen to use serials. If no one is successfully using serials on 2.0.x, I'll wait until Sitka upgrades to 2.2. I also hear that 2.2 has made it easier to set up prediction patterns (ability to pick monthly/weekly, etc instead of having to go through all the steps of the wizard). Thanks! Tara On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley lebbe...@esilibrary.com wrote: Hi Tara, I think the best way to answer your question would be to direct you to the serials section of the 2.1 release notes for what is effectively a list of features you'll be missing. http://open-ils.org/**documentation/release/RELEASE_** NOTES_2_1_0.html#_serials_**enhancementshttp://open-ils.org/documentation/release/RELEASE_NOTES_2_1_0.html#_serials_enhancements The list of new features in 2.2 over 2.1 is rather smaller. 2.0 will work, but the document linked gives you some idea of where the limitations will be. Hope this helps, Lebbeous On 05/01/2012 01:20 PM, Tara Robertson wrote: Hi, For folks using serials, what version are you on 2.1.? Is there anyone using serials on 2.0.2? In chatting with people at the conference I recall that Mieke and Dan S's libraries are using serials and on a newer version than 2.0.x. Does that mean that there are significant issues using serials on 2.0? We have a staff meeting today and I'm figuring out my work plan for the summer and am trying to figure out if we need to wait until Sitka upgrades before I can make headway with serials. Thanks, Tara -- Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley | Software Developer | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: lebbe...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] version and serials
Hi Lebbeous, Thanks for your quick reply. Looking at the 2.0 release notes I don't see much fleshed out about serials: http://open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=feature_list_2_0 I'm wondering if there's anyone who's actually using serials on a 2.0 release. I haven't been able to successfully set things up so that they work. By work I mean have the next issuance predict correctly. It's been awhile since I've put time into figuring out serials I have Mieke's patterns and will try again with the documentation. I'm not sure if the problem is my understanding (entirely possible), the documentation (seems less possible) or if the 2.0.2 version, that Sitka is running, or how Sitka has things configured. If no one is successfully using serials on 2.0.x, I'll wait until Sitka upgrades to 2.2. I also hear that 2.2 has made it easier to set up prediction patterns (ability to pick monthly/weekly, etc instead of having to go through all the steps of the wizard). On Tue, May 1, 2012 at 10:25 AM, Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley lebbe...@esilibrary.com wrote: Hi Tara, I think the best way to answer your question would be to direct you to the serials section of the 2.1 release notes for what is effectively a list of features you'll be missing. http://open-ils.org/**documentation/release/RELEASE_** NOTES_2_1_0.html#_serials_**enhancementshttp://open-ils.org/documentation/release/RELEASE_NOTES_2_1_0.html#_serials_enhancements The list of new features in 2.2 over 2.1 is rather smaller. 2.0 will work, but the document linked gives you some idea of where the limitations will be. Hope this helps, Lebbeous On 05/01/2012 01:20 PM, Tara Robertson wrote: Hi, For folks using serials, what version are you on 2.1.? Is there anyone using serials on 2.0.2? In chatting with people at the conference I recall that Mieke and Dan S's libraries are using serials and on a newer version than 2.0.x. Does that mean that there are significant issues using serials on 2.0? We have a staff meeting today and I'm figuring out my work plan for the summer and am trying to figure out if we need to wait until Sitka upgrades before I can make headway with serials. Thanks, Tara -- Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley | Software Developer | Equinox Software, Inc. / Your Library's Guide to Open Source | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: lebbe...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Should we have a systems administrators list?
Is Tagging enabled on the community mailman? Perhaps that is a solution that could provide more granular review of the list threads without dividing us up? How does that work? My google-fu is weak. :) One thing I'd like to avoid is getting into the whole manual convention of tagging subject headers, with stuff like [acq] or [cataloging]. kgs convinced me back in the day that such is a barrier to entry that can scare folks off. -- Jason Etheridge | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: ja...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com | Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org http://evergreen-ils.org
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
I agree with Rogan. I think the idea is to have a discussion more focused on system administration issues, rather then purely development, which is currently defined as the sole purpose of the dev list. Even though there likely would be membership overlap, having a sysadmin list would allow to focus specifically on the topic and not add noise on the dev list for those who are interested in the development only. Alexey Lazar PALS Information System Developer and Integrator 507-389-2907 http://www.mnpals.org/ On May 1, 2012, at 13:58 , rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net wrote: Personally, I didn't envision a sys-admin group as a siloing but as an opportunity for sys-admins to work on best practices and things that may be redundant or repetitive on the dev list. I can easily see conversations about how do we maintain 2.1 because we don't want to upgrade to 2.2 and are there selective patches we can use, etc which are the kinds of conversations we don't see a lot of now. If the practice were to fork the community rather than grow the dialogues, which is to say, take away from dev useful conversations about how and why that inform development then I would be -1. Quoting W. Brad LaJeunesse b...@esilibrary.com: I agree with Ben. Obviously, if a certain community sub-group decides it wants to create their own mailing list, there is no Evergreen police to stop you, but I think doing so is a mistake. One of the strengths of the Evergreen community that I think we've worked at is the lack of formal boundaries between our stakeholder groups. This isn't a proprietary system where the developers are locked in a dungeon and you must speak through Swiss intermediaries. We're also a relatively small group and I think the last thing we should be doing is splitting our forces. I suggest keeping it together and using subject lines effectively. So, I agree with Ben's thoughts. I just saw Lebbeous's email and I agree with his points as well. --- W. Brad LaJeunesse | President | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: b...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Ben Shum Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:15 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list? I'm -1 to this proposal. For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas for discussion. The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me a few years ago, I would have said yes. But here are some potential concerns I have now: While our role within our organizations may be to find the best practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to play in Evergreen's overall development. As system administrators, we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field. We can provide invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC. Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more information can become lost between groups if people do not subscribe to every list. While of course, many of us would likely be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists. Like say for example: John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the sys admin list. But it turns out to be an actual issue with the Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it fixed for everyone in the community. Do we then have to take the originally reported issue from the sys admin list and forward it to the dev list and discuss solutions? The extra time and potential for lost information/facts gives me concerns that having that extra layer of communication may prove unwieldy. Alternatively, what if someone posted a question to both mailing lists (sys admin and dev) and different people respond on each thread (based on whichever list they were subscribed) and the conversation becomes fractured between two lists? How does everything get put back together in a nice ordered way for the next generation of users searching for information / learning. To summarize, in my opinion, the system administrators while definitely having their own set of issues and topics of discussion are still a core part of
[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** RE: ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list?
I am in agreement with Rogan and Alexy. Although a member of the dev list I too would like to see somewhere to discuss purely sysadmin ideas not really related to dev. Stuart Forrest PhD, ACM Professional Member Library Systems Specialist Beaufort County Library 311 Scott Street, Beaufort, SC 29902 843-255-6450 sforr...@bcgov.net www.beaufortcountylibrary.org ** For Learning, For Leisure, For Life ** -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 4:48 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list? I agree with Rogan. I think the idea is to have a discussion more focused on system administration issues, rather then purely development, which is currently defined as the sole purpose of the dev list. Even though there likely would be membership overlap, having a sysadmin list would allow to focus specifically on the topic and not add noise on the dev list for those who are interested in the development only. Alexey Lazar PALS Information System Developer and Integrator 507-389-2907 http://www.mnpals.org/ On May 1, 2012, at 13:58 , rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net wrote: Personally, I didn't envision a sys-admin group as a siloing but as an opportunity for sys-admins to work on best practices and things that may be redundant or repetitive on the dev list. I can easily see conversations about how do we maintain 2.1 because we don't want to upgrade to 2.2 and are there selective patches we can use, etc which are the kinds of conversations we don't see a lot of now. If the practice were to fork the community rather than grow the dialogues, which is to say, take away from dev useful conversations about how and why that inform development then I would be -1. Quoting W. Brad LaJeunesse b...@esilibrary.com: I agree with Ben. Obviously, if a certain community sub-group decides it wants to create their own mailing list, there is no Evergreen police to stop you, but I think doing so is a mistake. One of the strengths of the Evergreen community that I think we've worked at is the lack of formal boundaries between our stakeholder groups. This isn't a proprietary system where the developers are locked in a dungeon and you must speak through Swiss intermediaries. We're also a relatively small group and I think the last thing we should be doing is splitting our forces. I suggest keeping it together and using subject lines effectively. So, I agree with Ben's thoughts. I just saw Lebbeous's email and I agree with his points as well. --- W. Brad LaJeunesse | President | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts | phone: 1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457) | email: b...@esilibrary.com | web: http://www.esilibrary.com -Original Message- From: open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org [mailto:open-ils-general-boun...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Ben Shum Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 12:15 PM To: Evergreen Discussion Group Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] ***SPAM*** Re: Should we have a systems administrators list? I'm -1 to this proposal. For many years, I've mused with other Evergreen system administrators on the issues facing our particular role and areas for discussion. The idea of making our own mailing list seemed like a good idea at many points in those discussions, and if you asked me a few years ago, I would have said yes. But here are some potential concerns I have now: While our role within our organizations may be to find the best practices for implementing/running an Evergreen system (and all the related areas of interest noted), we can also have a key role to play in Evergreen's overall development. As system administrators, we are often at the cutting edge of testing, bug reporting, and troubleshooting how Evergreen performs in the field. We can provide invaluable feedback to the Evergreen developers when we discuss our sys-admin issues in the existing lists / IRC. Creating a separate list introduces the possibility that more information can become lost between groups if people do not subscribe to every list. While of course, many of us would likely be signed up to these multiple lists and potentially act as representatives between groups, I do not like to see the burden of communication between various lists/groups to become a necessary conscious act on behalf of those subscribed to several lists. Like say for example: John Smith has an installation problem and mentions it only on the sys admin list. But it turns out to be an actual issue with the Evergreen code itself and we have to involve developers to get it fixed for everyone in the community. Do we then
Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Twitter Report on the Evergreen International Conference'2012
Hi, On 5/1/2012 5:06 PM, Vyacheslav Tykhonov wrote: As twitter website doesn't have archive, we're prepared twitter report based on all tweets for Evergreen conference, and I would like to share it with all attenders. You can read this report as Excel or CSV file, so I hope it can be really helpful for all us. It will indeed -- thanks for putting this together! Regards, Galen -- Galen Charlton Director of Support and Implementation Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts email: g...@esilibrary.com direct: +1 770-709-5581 cell: +1 404-984-4366 skype: gmcharlt web:http://www.esilibrary.com Supporting Koha and Evergreen: http://koha-community.org http://evergreen-ils.org
