SPEC Kit 340: Open Source Software  · 63
We don’t recommend it per se, rather we use an MIT-style license on our own software, as approved by the university.
We have no formal recommendation.
30. Please indicate how important each of the following indicators that your contribution to an OSS
project has been successful is to your library. Please make one selection per row. N=51
Reasons 1 Not
2 3 4 5 Very
The functionality better suits our institution’s needs 1 8 41 50
Amount of community contribution/involvement 1 8 14 17 10 50
Number of project adopters 2 8 15 18 7 50
Number of project releases 4 11 23 9 3 50
Ease of support 2 21 15 11 49
Staff time savings 5 7 17 14 6 49
Monetary savings 4 13 10 17 5 49
Other indicator(s) 2 1 1 1 5
Number of Responses 11 22 45 40 46 51
If you indicated above that the library relies on other indicator(s) that your contribution to an OSS
project has been successful, please briefly describe the indicator(s). N=3
Community interest in project [altmetrics, conference presentations, articles]
We are concerned to ensure that software systems are section 508 compliant, this indicator of success is not necessarily
subsumed under “functionality.”
Sustainability in terms of direction and responsiveness to meet evolving needs.
Additional Comments
Again, we don’t agree that OSS results in staff time savings or ease of support, so did not respond to those two
Who has adopted, and not just the number of adopters.
31. Please briefly describe why your library is not using any open source software. N=2
We don’t have a sufficient IT support to develop, customize, and maintain OSS software.
We have not done any major software selection processes in over five years, and the OSS products have not historically
had the functions we required. That may be changing looking forward.
Previous Page Next Page