[Dspace-general] [Dspace-devel] DSpace 2.0 Direction

[Mark Diggory]

As Peter Morgan has directed the thread to the General list, I do  
want to "cool things down a bit" before they get "out of hand". The  
comments are showing up here out of the context of the original  
thread. Here is some context by associating my my most recent post to  
the thread on dspace-devel. If you wish to view the thread, you may  
do so here:

https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=35F78A53- 
CAD6-4EFC-9D54-0A80A14064B1%40MIT.EDU&forum_name=dspace-devel

The only comment I would make to Peters post is that one would  
unequivocally agree that the Apache Foundation's flagship product  
(Apache HTTP Daemon) will always be an HTTP daemon, but that how it  
is implemented will change over time. ASF works to foster and support  
the continued development of the product, but doesn't stipulate to  
the developers to "how" it is to be implemented, just that it has to  
be implemented and implemented "well". HTTPD has certainly gone  
through different incarnations over the years (some more  
controversial that others), but it is and will always be, an HTTP  
daemon.  I think we can rest assured that DSpace will always be a  
Institutional Repository System, but that to be a healthy project,  
DSpace (the software) will certainly change in how it is implemented  
over time and that there are a number of forces that drive this  
evolution on many different levels.

Cheers,
Mark

> I just want to comment on something I posted initially in the email
> thread.
>
> On Jul 5, 2007, at 11:02 AM, Mark Diggory wrote:
>>
>> "In my humblest of opinion", I do not think that the Foundation
>> leadership should be at all involved with the requirements, specs or
>> development effort behind 2.0. But that they should rather take a
>> stance (not unlike that of the Apache Foundation) to be supporting
>> and protecting the rights of the DSpace developer community and
>> fostering the developers role deciding the direction that the DSpace
>> code-base will go in.
>
> My statement here could be interpreted as rather caustic towards the
> idea of Foundation involvement and I want to correct that. I am very
> supportive of Foundation involvement and don't want to suggest that
> it is at all an issue.  So I hope I'm clearing any misinterpretation
> here.
>
> I do feel our developer community itself has to take a greater roll
> in its own internal leadership and that is interdependent with (or in
> concert with) the foundation.  That rather than folks asking, "When
> are they (whomever they are) going to create/release 2.0?", that
> instead we ask ourselves, "How can we (the community) work together
> in the creation of DSpace 2.0?".  To have a healthy OS community, you
> need to feel totally empowered to participate and that it is you that
> creates the software.
>
> I think I can speak for the community in saying that; If your a
> developer working with DSpace anywhere in the world, the community
> welcomes your participation at any level and needs your participation
> to continue to maintain a bright future for DSpace.  That if
> motivated, anyone can can take on a developer role, have their voice
> heard within our community and be pivotal in the direction that we go
> in.
>
> I want to reiterate that we are very much in need of the Foundations
> assistance in many ways to support DSpace moving forward. I think I
> can speak for the whole developer community when we say that we
> welcome all efforts to enable the community in evolving the software
> towards the goals we've outlined in our communities Architectural
> Roadmap.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark

~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark R. Diggory - DSpace Systems Manager
MIT Libraries, Systems and Technology Services
Massachusetts Institute of Technology