Open Source Library
Automation
The Current State of the Art
Marshall Breeding
Director for Innovative Technologies and Research
Vanderbilt University
http://staffweb.library.vanderbilt.edu/breeding
http://www.librarytechnology.org/
Program Description
One of the major movements in the library
automation arena involves the explosive interest
in open source ILS. Open ILSs now stand as
viable options for libraries. This workshop will
present open source ILS options in the context
of the overall library automation industry and
pose the questions that librarians need to ask as
they make decisions between open source and
traditionally licensed automation systems. While
open source presents exciting opportunities, it’s
important to go forward with realistic
expectations. Attend this workshop to explore
the options.
Library Technology Guides

http://www.librarytechnology.org
Repository for library automation data
 Lib-web-cats tracks 37,000 libraries and the
automation systems used.

– Expanding to include more international scope

Announcements and developments made by
companies and organizations involved in library
automation technologies
Automation in Connecticut Libraries
Recent Upheavals






Industry Consolidation continues
Abrupt transitions for major library automation
products
Increased industry control by external financial
investors
Demise of the traditional OPAC
Frustration with ILS products and vendors
Open Source alternatives hit the mainstream
Breeding, Marshall: Perceptions 2007 an international survey of library automation.
http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2007.pl January 2008.
LJ Automation System
Marketplace
Annual Industry report published in Library
Journal:







2008:
2007:
2006:
2005:
2004:
2003:
2002:
Opportunity out of turmoil
An industry redefined
Reshuffling the deck
Gradual evolution
Migration down, innovation up
The competition heats up
Capturing the migrating customer
ILS Industry in Transition
Consolidation through mergers and acquisitions
have resulted in a fewer number of players;
larger companies
 Uncomfortable level of product narrowing
 Increased ownership by external interests
 Yet: Some companies and products continue on
solid ground

Breeding, Marshall “Automation system marketplace 2008: Opportunity Out of Turmoil”
Library Journal. April 1, 2008.
Results of industry turmoil
Disruptions and business decisions to narrow
options have caused major shifts in the library
automation industry
 fueled the open source movement and created a
huge market for companies supporting open
source ILS
 Influx of business towards companies with
reliable track record
 Traditionally licensed and open source ILS
alternatives will coexist in the ILS arena

Open Source ILS enters the
mainstream
Earlier era of pioneering efforts to ILS
shifting into one where open source
alternatives fall in the mainstream
 Off-the-shelf, commercially supported
product available
 Still a minority player, but gaining ground

– Next LJ Automation System Marketplace
article will update the score

Are they next-generation systems or open
source version of legacy models?
Open Source Software
Broad Trends
Open Source Infrastructure
IT Infrastructure
Linux
 Apache

– Lucene
– Solr
MySql
 PostgreSQL

Web Server deployment
Source: Netcraft www.netcraft.com
Operating System Market Share
IDC figures for OS on new server
shipments 3Q 2007:
 Windows Server: 67.1%
 Linux:
22.8%

– Slight gain for Windows/loss for Linux over
previous quarter
Trends
Open Source Software well established in
for general IT infrastructure
 Linux emerging as the dominant flavor of
Unix
 Commercial options continue to prosper

Open Source Library Software
(non-ILS)
General Infrastructure Components

Index Data
– YAZ toolkit
 Z39.50
 SRU/W
– Zebra XML Search Engine
– Metaproxy
 “metasearching proxy front end server for
integrating access to multiple back-end Z39.50compliant databases”
– MasterKey federated search engine
Open Search Federated
Search
LibraryFind
Open source federated search
 Built-in OpenURL resolver
 3-teired caching
 Customizable interface
 Developed by the University of Oregon
Libraries

Masterkey
Developed by Index Data
 Highly optimized, multithreaded searching
of many databases
 Faceted browsing of results
 Demo: masterkey.indexdata.com

Digital Repository Applications
Fedora
Open source digital repository engine
 Not an out-of-the-box solution

– Many organizations have developed their own
interfaces and applications built on top of
Fedora
VTLS Vital product based on Fedora
 Supported by Fedora Commons

– http://www.fedora-commons.org/
Dspace
Institutional Repository Application
 Originally developed by Hewlett Packard
and MIT
 http://www.dspace.org
 Widely deployed by Universities for
institutional repository projects

Keystone
Developed by Index Data
 Open source digital repository application

– Digital content management
– Federated search
– OAI harvesting
– Link resolver services
Open source discovery
products
AKA: Next Generation Catalogs
VUFind – Villanova
University
Based on Apache Solr search toolkit
http://www.vufind.org/
eXtensible Catalog
University of Rochester – River Campus
Libraries
 Financial support from the Andrew W.
Mellon Foundation
 http://www.extensiblecatalog.info/

– Just received a second round of funding from
Mellon
 $283,000 (April 2006)
 $749,000 (October 2007)
– Wider institutional participation
Scriblio
Formerly WPopac
 OPAC based on WordPress

A Mandate for Openness
Opportunities for Openness

Open Source
– Alternative to traditionally licensed software

Open Systems
– Software that doesn’t hold data hostage
More Open Systems




Pressure for traditionally licensed products to become
more open
APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) let libraries
access and manipulate their data outside of delivered
software
A comprehensive set of APIs potentially give libraries
more flexibility and control in accessing data and
services and in extending functionality than having
access to the source code.
Customer access to APIs does not involve as much risk
to breaking core system functions, avoids issues of
version management and code forking associated with
open source models.
More Open Systems




Pressure for traditionally licensed products to become
more open
APIs (Application Programming Interfaces) let libraries
access and manipulate their data outside of delivered
software
A comprehensive set of APIs potentially give libraries
more flexibility and control in accessing data and
services and in extending functionality than having
access to the source code.
Customer access to APIs does not involve as much risk
to breaking core system functions, avoids issues of
version management and code forking associated with
open source models.
A Continuum of Openness
Closed Systems
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
No
programmable
Access to the
system.
Captive to the
user
Interfaces
supplied by the
developer
Standard RDBM Systems
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
Database
administrators
can access data
stores involved
with the system:
Read-only?
Read/write?
Developer
shares database
schema
Open Source Model
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
All aspects of
the system
available to
inspection and
modification.
Open API Model
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
Published APIs
Core
application
closed.
Third party
developers
code against
the published
APIs or
RDBMS tables.
Open Source / Open API Model
End User
Interfaces:
Programmer
access:
Functional
modules:
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Cataloging Circulation Acquisitions
Published APIs
Core
application
closed.
Third party
developers
code against
the published
APIs or
RDBMS tables.
Depth of Openness

Evaluate level of access to a products data
stores and functional elements:
– Open source vs Traditional licenses

Some traditional vendors have well established
API implementations
– SirsiDynix Unicorn (API available to authorized
customer sites that take training program)
– Ex Libris: consistent deployment of APIs in major
products, recent strategic initiative: “Open Platform
Program”
– Innovative Interfaces: Patron API
Universal open APIs?


Some progress on API to support discovery layer
interfaces, but no comprehensive framework yet.
Many industry protocols work like APIs:
– Z39.50, SRU/W, NCIP, OAI-PMH, OpenURL, etd

It would be ideal if there were an open set of APIs that
were implemented by all automation system products.
– Third party components and add-ons would then work across all
products.

DLF ILS-Discovery Interface protocol. Targets
interoperability between ILS and new genre of interfaces
 AKA: Berkeley Accords
Opportunity out of the
Upheavals

More options
– Commercial + Open Source

More vendors
– New open source support companies provide new
competition

More library involvement
– Libraries re-energized to make significant
contributions to the body of library automation
software

Traditionally licensed and open source
automation systems will co-exist. We have an
interest in the success of both alternatives.
Web 2.0 / Collaborative
Computing
Currently implemented ad hoc
 Many libraries putting up blogs, wikis, and
fostering engagement in social networking sites
 Proliferation of silos with no integration or
interoperability with larger library Web presence
 Next Gen: Build social and collaborative features
into core automation components

Open Source in the ILS arena
Products and trends
Open Source ILS enters the
mainstream
Earlier era of pioneering efforts to ILS
shifting into one where open source
alternatives fall in the mainstream
 Off-the-shelf, commercially supported
product available
 Still a minority player, but gaining ground

Tracking the Open Source
Movement
Through Marshall’s articles and
columns
March 2002: Open source ILS: still
a distant possibility
“I do not, however, expect to see such victories
of Open Source software over commercial
products in the integrated library system arena.
Both broad historical and recent trends argue
against a movement toward libraries creating
their own library automation systems—either in
an Open Source or closed development process.”
 Early open source efforts included Avanti,
Pytheas, OpenBook, and Koha
 3 out of 4 now defunct

Source: Information Technologies and Libraries, Mar 2002
Oct 2002: An update on Open
Source ILS

“the open source systems such as the
three mentioned above are but a small
blip on the radar. Compared to the
thousands of libraries that acquire
automation systems from commercial
vendors each year, the handful that use
open source systems cannot yet be noted
as a trend. “
– Discussed Koha, LearningAccess ILS, Avanti
MicroLCS
Source: Information Today, Oct 2002
http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=9975
… then the world changed
Mar 2007: On update on Open
Source ILS
“As I look back at my 2002 column on open source ILS, I see that I
mentioned both Koha and the Learning-Access ILS. Over this 4-year
time period I have seen Koha usage increase from a single library
system to two or more library systems plus a few individual public
libraries and a large number of other small ones. The
LearningAccess ILS is used in 15 libraries. Evergreen currently
represents the largest group of libraries sharing a single open
source ILS implementation.
Over the same time period, well over 40,000 libraries have purchased a
commercial ILS. So, relative to the entire library automation arena,
those using an open source ILS still represent a minuscule portion
of the whole.
That said, conditions are ripe for a more rapid adoption of open source
ILS than we have seen in the past. “
Source: Computers in Libraries, Mar 2007
http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=12445
Mar 2008: Making a business case
for Open Source ILS
We’re living in a phase of library automation characterized
by an increased interest in open source-not just in
back-end infrastructure components but also in the
mission-critical business applications such as the
integrated library system. Open source library
automation systems, including Koha and Evergreen,
have been propelled into the limelight. Recent survey
data fails to corroborate broad interest that libraries are
ready to adopt open source ILS. The success of early
adopters of open source ILS now serve as a
catalyst for others. Paths now exist with more
mature systems and professional support options.
As the open source movement matures, these system
will need to compete on their own merits and not solely
on a philosophical preference.
Source: Computers in Libraries, Mar 2008
http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=13134
Apr 2008: Automation System
Marketplace
“Last year marked the launch of the open source
ILS into the mainstream; it received major
attention in the press and at library conferences.
From a business perspective, open source ILS
contracts represented a very small portion of the
library automation economy. The success of
early adopters' implementations has already
diminished skepticism. Many indicators suggest
that open source ILS contracts will displace
larger percentages of traditional licensing
models in each subsequent year.
Source: “Automation System Marketplace: Opportunity out of Turmoil”
April 1, 2008
An industry in turmoil
Disruptions and business decisions to
narrow options have fueled the open
source movement
 Benefit to libraries in having additional
options
 Traditionally licensed and open source ILS
alternatives will coexist in the ILS arena

Open Source vs Traditional
licensing
Taking sides?
 Both viable options
 Avoid philosophical preference
 Which best supports the missions of
libraries?
 Which approach helps libraries become
better libraries

Current Open Source ILS
Product Options
Koha: first Open Source ILS
Koha + Index Data Zebra = Koha ZOOM
 Components:

– Perl
– Apache
– MySql
– Zebra: search engine option for larger
installations
Libraries committed to Koha

300+ libraries

Horowhenua Library Trust
Nelsonville Public Library

– Athens County, OH

Crawford County Federated Library System
– 10 Libraries in PA

Howard County, MD
– Service area population: 266300
– 4.7 million circulation transactions in 2006
– 1 million volumes


Central Kansas Library System
Santa Cruz Public Library
– Central, 9 branches
– 2 million volumes

Near East University Library
Koha
Evergreen
Developed by the Georgia Public Library
Service
 Small development team
 June 2004 – development begins
 Sept 5, 2006 – live production
 Streamlined environment: single shared
implementation, all libraries follow the
same policies, one library card

Libraries using Evergreen

Georgia PINES
– http://gapines.org

Georgia PINES:
– 1 Installation
– 54 Public Library Systems
– 260+ library facilities
– Does not include municipal systems: Atlanta-Fulton County,
Cobb County




Province of British Columbia in Canada – SITKA
Kent County, MD
Evergreen Indiana
Under consideration by academic libraries in
Canada
Evergreen
OPALS

Open source Automated Library System
– http://www.mediaflex.net/showcase.jsp?record_id=52

Developed and Supported by Media Flex
– Harry Chan
– Original developer of Mandarin
– Installation ($250) and Hosting services ($750)
South Central Organization of (School) Libraries
 consortium of K-12 school libraries in NY

Libraries using OPALs





Dutchess County BOCES School Library System Union Catalog
Rockland County BOCES School Library System Union Catalog
– manage as many as half a million unique titles and close to a
million holdings.
South Central Organization Of (School) Library Systems
– 1.7 million titles and more than 3 million holdings for 300
schools
24 school libraries in Rockland County use OPALS open source
software to manage the daily operations of their libraries
In New York State, 15 BOCES School Library Systems provide
interlibrary loan services and building level management services to
900 school libraries using OPALS open source software
Source: Harry Chan. MediaFlex
OPALS
NextGenLib





ILS designed for the developing world
Originally traditionally licensed, introduced 2003
Transition to Open Source in Jan 2008
122 Installations (India, Syria, Sudan, Cambodia)
Collaborative project:
– Kesavan Institute of Information and Knowledge Management
– Versus Solutions
– Versus IT Services Pvt. Ltd

http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltgdisplaytext.pl?RC=13150
ILS Deployments
Unicorn
1704
Koha (Total)
Horizon
1612
Koha (LibLime)
Millennium
1289
Evergreen
Voyager
1183
OPALS
Aleph 500
1970
Library.Solution
700
200-300
90
272
58 / 170
Commercial Involvement
Companies formed to support
open source library products
The Open Source Business Front

Index Data
– Founded 1994; No ILS; A variety of other open source products to
support libraries: search engines, federated search, Z39.50 toolkit, etc

LibLime
– Founded 2005. Provides development and support services for Koha
ILS. Acquired original developers of Koha in Feb 2007.

Equinox.
– Founded Feb 2007; staff formerly associated with GPLS Pines
development team

Care Affiliates
X
– Founded June 2007; headed by industry veteran Carl Grant.
 Acquired by Care Affiliates July 2008 as Grant joins Ex Libris

MediaFlex.
– Longstanding school library automation company. Latest generation ILS
developed in open source model
LibLime





Small, but growing, private company formed in
early 2005
Devoted to support of Koha and other open
source software
Launched by individuals involved with the Koha
implementation at the Nelsonville Public Library
Acquired the Koha activities of Katipo
Communications (Feb 2007)
Total of 20 FTE – Hiring industry veterans exiting
from traditional ILS companies
Equinox Software
Small company
 Devoted to facilitating libraries implement
Evergreen the open source ILS developed for
PINES
 Launched by individuals related to the
development and implementation of Evergreen
at the Georgia Public Library System
 Contracts to GPLS and other libraries for the
ongoing development and support of Evergreen

Care Affiliates





Recently formed company to provide support for
Open Source library automation products.
Carl Grant – Former COO of VTLS, President of
Ex Libris (USA), Innovative Interfaces, DRA, etc.
No ILS product. Limited number of contracts.
Primary initiative involved federated search
Company assets sold to LibLime in July 2008.
Open Source Issues
Explosive interest in Open Source driven
by disillusionment with current vendors
 Seen as a solution to:

– Allow libraries to have more flexible systems
– Lower costs
– Not be vulnerable to disruptions that come
with mergers and acquisitions
Beginning to emerge as a mainstream
option
 TOC (Total Cost of Ownership) still roughly

Cost issues

Costs shifted from traditional software licensing
models
– No initial purchase of license or annual license fees






Hardware costs (same as traditional)
Vendor support costs (optional)
Hosting services
Conversion services
Local technical support (may be higher)
Development costs – vague models for nextgeneration development
Risk Factors

Open Source still a risky Alternative
– Dependency on community organizations and
commercial companies that provide development an
support services

Commercial/Proprietary options also a risk
– Opinions vary, but:
“the traditional ILS market is no longer a haven for the
risk adverse.”
(Northern PINES talking points
http://pines.bclibrary.ca/resources/talking-points)
Open source ILS Benchmarks
Most decisions to adopt Open Source ILS based
on philosophical reasons
 Open Source ILS will enter the main stream
once its products begin to win through objective
procurement processes

– Hold open source ILS to the same standards as the
commercial products
– Hold the open source ILS companies to the same
standards:
 Adequate customer support ratios, financial stability, service
level agreements, etc.

Well-document total cost of ownership
statements that can be compared to other
vendor price quotes
Measuring Interest in Open Source
ILS
Source: Perceptions 2007: an international survey of Library Automation
http://www.librarytechnology.org/perceptions2007.pl
Open Source Market share
Open Source ILS implementations still a small
percentage of the total picture
 Initial set of successful implementations will
likely serve as a catalyst to pave the way for
others
 Successful implementations in wider range of
libraries:

– State-wide consortium (Evergreen)
– Multi-site public library systems (Koha)
– School district consortia (OPALS)
Open Source perspective
Are open source ILS products taking library automation
in a new direction, or are they open source versions of
what we already have?
 Will current slate of companies be able to support
increasing numbers of libraries without the same
difficulties as the incumbent ILS vendors?
 The ILS landscape is forever changed by the open
source alternatives
 Open Source ILS catching up with the Legacy ILS. Both
moving headstrong into the past.
 Urgent need for a new generation of library automation
designed for current and future-looking library missions
and workflows.

Moving toward new
generation of library
automation
Rethinking the ILS
Fundamental assumption: Print + Digital = Hybrid
libraries
 Traditional ILS model not adequate for hybrid libraries
 Libraries currently moving toward surrounding core ILS
with additional modules to handle electronic content
 New discovery layer interfaces replacing or
supplementing ILS OPACS
 Working toward a new model of library automation

– Monolithic legacy architectures replaced by fabric of SOA
applications
– Comprehensive Resource Management
“It's Time to Break the Mold of the Original ILS” Computers in Libraries Nov/Dec 2007
ILS: a legacy concept?

ILS = Integrated Library System
(Cataloging + Circulation + OPAC + Serials +
Acquisitions)
Focused on print and physical inventory
Electronic content at the Journal Title or
collection level
 Emerged in the 1960’s – 1970’s
 Functionality has evolved and expanded, but
basic concepts and modules remain intact



Note: Some companies work toward evolving the ILS to
competently handle both print and digital content (e.g.
Innovative Interfaces)
ILS: ever diminishing role





Many libraries putting much less emphasis on
ILS
Just an inventory system for physical materials
Investments in electronic content increasing
Management of e-content handled outside of the
ILS
Yet: libraries need comprehensive business
automation more than ever. Mandate for more
efficient operations. Do more with less.
Dis-integration of Library
Automation Functionality
ILS -- Print and Physical inventory
 OpenURL Link resolver
 Federated Search
 Electronic Resource Management Module
 Discovery layer interface

Is non-integrated automation
sustainable?





Major burden on library personnel
Serial procurement / installation / configuration /
maintenance cycles take many years to result in
a comprehensive environment
Inefficient data models
Disjointed interfaces for library users
Very long cycle to gain comprehensive
automation
Breaking down the modules

Traditional ILS
– Cataloging
– Circulation
– Online Catalog
– Acquisitions
– Serials control
– Reporting

Modern approach: SOA
Service Oriented Architecture
http://www.sun.com/products/soa/benefits.jsp
Legacy ILS + e-content modules
End User
Interfaces:
Circulation
Functional
modules:
Federated
Search
Cataloging
Data Stores:
Staff Interfaces:
Acquisitions
Serials
OpenURL
Linking
Electronic
Resource
Mgmt
System
SOA model for business automation

Underlying data repositories
– Local or Global
Reusable business services
 Composite business applications

SOA for library workflow processes
Composite
Applications
Granular
tasks:
Data Stores:
Reusable
Business
Services
Comprehensive Resource
Management
Broad conceptual approach that proposes a
library automation environment that spans all
types of content that comprise library
collections.
 Traditional ILS vendors: Under development but
no public announcements
 Open Source projects in early phases
 Projection: 2-3 years until we begin see library
automation systems that follow this approach. 57 years for wider adoption.

Open Library Environment (OLE)
project

Andrew W. Mellon Foundation
– Research in Information Technology program
– Solicited proposal / Lead institution




Duke University selected to lead project
Core Participants: Kansas University, Lehigh University, National
Library of Australia, Library and Archives Canada, University of
Pennsylvania, Marshall Breeding
Advisory Participants: University of Chicago, Wittier College,
University of Maryland, ORBIS Cascade Alliance, Rutgers University
Status: Project underway: First in-person meeting, scope document
underway, SOA training, first public webcast. Participants actively
engaged in process.
http://oleproject.org
Combine and Consolidate?

What is the ideal configuration to use an ILS?
– Single Library (including branches)
– Shared regional system
– Statewide ILS?

Trend toward increased numbers of facilities sharing an
ILS
– Several examples of multiple consortia combining to share one
ILS implementation
– Many initiatives toward statewide ILS implementations
– Internationally: some country-wide ILS implementations (e.g.
COBISS in Slovenia)

The days of the one-library ILS are fading
Scalability?
The viable size of an implementation not
as much an issue as in earlier phases of
computing
 Hardware scales almost infinitely
 Major ILS products scale almost infinitely

Opportunities for the
underserved





Many libraries in the United States operate with no
automation system or use PC-based systems with no
Web access or resource sharing options
Many libraries run outdated systems
Current models put automation out of the reach of public
libraries with small local tax base
Large-scale automation efforts can offer affordable (or
free) access to these libraries
Compare: Number of un-automated public libraries in
the UK: 1
Questions?