Evergreen DokuWiki

Evergreen is an open source software application that provides a full spectrum of library management functionality - such as patron administration and circulation management - for libraries and library consortia around the world. Like many successful open source software projects, Evergreen is used, developed, and supported by a large virtual community that includes individuals, nonprofit organizations, and commercial vendors. Evergreen community leaders are currently working to create a formal governance and management structure for the project to ensure that the community continues to grow and collaborate effectively.

The Evergreen Web Planning Team was chartered by the emerging Evergreen Communications Committee to:

1) gather input about the Evergreen community's online/website requirements, and,

2) develop a plan for a flexible, effective, and user-friendly platform that will satisfy the community's growing online/website requirements.

This document is the result of several months of strategic planning, requirements analysis, and community discussion.

II. History of Web Planning Process

III. Strategic Goals of Evergreen Web Presence

IV. The Evergreen Online Community A. Existing Community Properties: Websites and More

The Evergreen community as a whole operates as a virtual community with the exception of occasional face-to-face meetings at conferences, sector events, etc. A number of different online properties are maintained by various community members.

1. Website/general: evergreen-ils.org / open-ils.org

The current community website serves as a home for the Evergreen software itself as well as many of the project's "official" resources. The site is a combination of static HTML and the DokuWiki collaborative documentation platform operated somewhat informally by a group of developers. Recently, members of the Web Planning Team and other community members have begun work on incremental improvements to the existing site, such as improving navigation.

Evergreen-ils.org (and open-ils.org, which is a domain redirect) provide:

a. Download and implementation information b. Links to off-site demonstrations and development resources c. Information about connecting with the Evergreen developer community d. Developers' road map e. Links to non-development-related project efforts such as the Governance Committee, Communications Committee, and Documentation Interest Group.

2. Website/Developer collaboration: www.launchpad.net/evergreen

The primary collaboration platform for the Evergreen development community is a Launchpad instance. Developers utilize this service for bug tracking, user support, and version control.

(@@@TODO Where do official docs live? DIG meeting space?)

3. Website/general: planet.evergreen-ils.org

Like many "planet" sites, planet.evergreen-ils.org is a blog aggregator for the community, collecting and displaying Evergreen-related content from multiple blogs and other sites. This site was setup by community member dan@coffeecode.net.

4. Website/general: rscel.evergreen-ils.org

RSCEL, the Resource Sharing Cooperative of Evergreen Libraries, is a collaboration of various libraries and consortia using the Evergreen ILS. The RSCEL site offers resources for existing Evergreen users as well as information for potential users that are considering a migration to Evergreen for their library. While the primary evergreen-ils.org website is focused primarily on the Evergreen software and its development, RSCEL's online resources are aimed at users "before the software" (decision-makers) and "beyond the software" (user- and implementation-specific resources). The RSCEL website provides:

a. Evergreen feature index and software comparison matrix b. Evergreen feature request/wishlist tracker (beta) c. KCLS Requirement Prioritization Application (beta) d. Evergreen organization/institution profile directory (beta) e. Ability to be notified of new Evergreen-related content f. Links to off-site demonstrations and development resources

The RSCEL website is built using Drupal and maintained by The Galecia Group on behalf of the Evergreen community.

5. Email lists/various: http://evergreen-ils.org/listserv.php

Georgia Public Library Services provides an email list server for use by the Evergreen community and various teams within the community. The "General" list is the primary vehicle for community-based user support in the Evergreen community, as well as Evergreen-related news, announcements, and other content. In addition, separate mailing lists are used for collaboration by the Evergreen developers, the Documentation Interest Group, and the Communications Committee. All mailing lists are publicly archived at the URL listed above.

6. IRC/general: irc.freenode.net#evergreen / http://evergreen-ils.org/irc.php

Many Evergreen developers and other community members are active in the Evergreen chat room on the Freenode Internet Relay Chat (IRC) service. In addition to being a venue for possible real-time support, the chat room is also used for community and developer meetings. All IRC transcripts are archived onto the web at the URL listed above.

B. Composition / Audience Analysis

1. Community Size Estimates

@@TODO Community census? @@TODO Analyze list of Markmail posters @@TODO From GSoC population? @@TODO Total library systems? @@TODO # of libs on EG list * ave. # of potential staff per lib

2. Evergreen Website Visitor Analysis

3. RSCEL Website Visitor Analysis

C. Integration Between Properties

1. Unified Search Google Custom: non-wiki, IRC transcripts, Email archives, RSCEL, more? Dokuwiki: wiki only

2. Shared content?

3. Feeds and syndication

V. Defining Our Users and Their Requirements

User stories are simple descriptions of features, written in plain English, that help website developers effectively plan a new website with the website users in mind. Since different groups of website users have different requirements, some user stories may only apply to certain user groups, e.g., "Evergreen Developer" or "Potential Evergreen Implementers."

Immediately after finalizing the strategic requirements listed above, the Web Planning Team began an analysis of Evergreen community members. The primary goal of this analysis was to catalog as many different roles in the community as possible, thus ensuring that the Team would consider the requirements of all potential users.

The following criteria were used when discussing community groups and roles:

– where users are located geographically – where users are in the OSLS/EG adoption process (potential/information-gathering, migration process, production environment, etc.) – where users are coming to the site from (referral links, search engines, etc.) – what users' goals are when they visit an EG property ("why are they here?"), and – what we need to convey to them for an effective interaction to take place from our perspective ("why do we, as site planners, care if they visit" –> "what defines success for the EG web properties?").

Within this framework, the team identified many groups of EG community members, some of which overlap and some which are distinct. As with other planning phases, regular updates and requests for comments were made to the general community list.

A. Identified Groups Within the EG Community

The following list of groups of Evergreen community members was finalized by the Web Team in January 2011:

1. "Administrators" administer one or more Evergreen systems for their organization.

2. "Developers" perform the actual application development (programming) of the Evergreen software.

3. "Documentors" include members of the Documentation Interest Group and other community members responsible for producing documentation of Evergreen software and/or processes.

4. "Consultants" are third-party vendors or service providers that assist organizations with Evergreen implementations in some capacity.

5. "Governance Members" are members of the Evergreen Governance Committee, the team tasked with creating the future "Evergreen Foundation."

6. "Webmasters" are members of the Evergreen Communications Committee and other identified community members responsible for maintaining the community website.

7. "Potentials" are those users considering a future implementation of Evergreen for their organization.

8. "Skeptics" are potential users that are explicitly unsure of open source development methodology, support models, open source ILS in general, or Evergreen specifically.

9. "Migration" users are planning or in the middle of a migration to Evergreen.

10. "Standalone" users are existing or potential Evergreen users of a single-library implementation of Evergreen.

11. "Extenders" include third-party developers, integrators, and other "unofficial" developers with an interest in Evergreen development and source code.

12. "Install" users are seeking information about Evergreen software repositories and related downloads.

13. "Translators" participate in translating the Evergreen software and/or documentation.

14. "Accessibility" users participate in ensuring Evergreen software, documentation, and website are as accessible to as many users as possible.

B. Functionality-related Requirements vs. Content-related Requirements

For each group of website users identified, the Web Team wrote multiple requirements in the form of user stories. As in previous phases of the planning process, frequent feedback was given to - and sought from - the community via the general mailing list. The Web Team tracked two separate types of user stories: those related to functionality, and those related to content.

User stories can be related to website functionality, such as activities, applications, and tasks that users perform. For instance, an online event calendar that allows committees to schedule recurring monthly meetings is an example of a functionality-related user story.

User stories can also be related to content on the website, such as specific documents, materials, multimedia, or pages. For instance, having a special page on the website explaining the benefits of Evergreen to people who don't currently use it is an example of a content-related user story.

A complete list of user stories, classified by user role, is available in "Appendix C: Complete list of identified user stories."

C. Community Feedback Survey

1. Planning Process

Although the Web Planning team sought feedback and comments from the community via the general mailing list, a formal survey was also desired to get detailed and structured feedback. Several team members created a draft survey, which was then refined with feedback from the rest of the team. The methods and goals of the survey included:

• achieving high diversity of targets and responses (in terms of various stakeholder groups and audience/user/visitor groups)
• high response rate (we don't really have a denominator for response rate calculation)
• depth of responses (e.g., “I like blogs” vs. “I would like to see a feature wishlist system with specific features X, Y, and Z”)
• make it as easy as possible for community members to suggest miscellaneous requests and suggestions (unstructured feedback)
• provide structured feedback opportunities (e.g., “would you prefer Feature A to be implemented as X or as Y?” or “Rank Features A through G in preferred order”)

2. Survey

Once the team had achieved consensus on the content to be presented in the survey, two team members took the lead in crafting the survey in the SurveyMonkey tool. The survey was released to the community on March 1st, 2011 and publicized via the Evergreen general mailing list. The community was asked to complete the survey within two weeks of the release, and follow-up reminders were sent as well. Approximately 42 respondents completed the survey.

The aggregate survey results are included as a PDF attachment in Appendix B. Although a complete set of detailed, per-respondent survey results was also downloaded and analyzed by the Web Team, it was decided that those should not be published since respondents were never informed their answers could be made public.

Following the survey, the Web Team conducted two meetings to analyze and discuss the results. While the survey results did reinforce some existing notions about the community's use of the website, some interesting points were made:

* Who responded? * The survey was advertised almost exclusively on the Evergreen mailing list, which is populated by both existing and potential users of Evergreen. Over 20% of survey respondents identified themselves as potential Evergreen users not currently using the software. The Web Team had anticipated that this user group would be underrepresented in the survey respondents due to lack of interest, so this was a fortunate surprise. * The "standalone" user role was defined relatively late in the user role planning phase, and there was some curiosity among the Web Team as to how many users that role included. However, 10% of survey respondents identified themselves with a one-library organization, validating this role and justifying specific content targeted to its members. * Over 60% of survey respondents classified their library/organization as a public library, followed by college/university or "other." Only a single respondent identified themselves with a K-12 library or library system. The Web Team {@@@INC IN RECO} discussed ways to help K-12 Evergreen users connect, as well as bigger picture objectives of increasing awareness of Evergreen in the broader K-12 community. * When asked to identify their role - or more commonly, roles - in their library or system's Evergreen project, the average respondent selected approximately four of the presented options. This figure satisfied the Web Team's goal of diversity of response and also confirmed the suspicion that Evergreen community members tended to wear "multiple hats" within their project. From a website planning perspective, {@@@INC IN RECO} this indicates the need for built-in site tools that help website users manage multiple interests and monitor information from various sources. For example, users may benefit from a customizable news feed that presents information only from topics of interest that they have identified. * As mentioned above, respondents were given several options when asked to identify their role(s). Some of these roles were specific to individual Evergreen implementations, such as "installing/maintaining Evergreen" or "training/supporting end users." However, some of the roles also explicitly mentioned - or at least implied participation - in the greater Evergreen community, outside of the scope of an individual project. These roles included functions such as website maintenance or content creation, documentation, translation, etc. A relatively high number of respondents identified with the community participation roles. From a high-level perspective, this is very encouraging: it indicates a healthy, interconnected community ecology as opposed to a standalone email list populated solely by self-interested individuals seeking specific technical answers or other goals. * Given the importance of community participation, the Web Team was encouraged to note that approximately 25% of respondents say they have contributed to the Evergreen website in the past; a variety of contributions were mentioned, primarily documentation. * Users who stated that they had not contributed content were asked why they had not, in an attempt to identify any cultural or technical barriers to contribution. The majority of reasons can be sorted into three main groups: a) Users who felt they had no valuable content to contribute due to relative inexperience with the Evergreen software, e.g., "…only recently migrated…" This attitude is to be expected in such a young community such as Evergreen; however, the rapid uptake of Evergreen in libraries around the world should translate relatively quickly into a large increase of potential website contributors. b) Users who felt they had no valuable content to contribute due to perceived lack of technical capability, e.g., "…not a programmer…" Non-developers provide value to an open source software ecosystem in many ways that are just as valuable as the developers themselves, such as documentation, quality assurance and testing, business/system analysis functions, etc. It is critical to encourage a strong culture of contribution and collaboration within the community so that these non-developer assets can be fully used. c) Users who are unsure of how to contribute content to the website, e.g., "…not sure how to go about doing it…" This attitude indicates a need for tools, documentation, and processes that allow as many community members as possible to easily contribute valuable information to the website in an effective manner. {@@@INC IN RECO} From a website planning perspective, this can be considered a strong mandate to encourage a culture of active participation and provide website tools that encourage participation and remove barriers from as many potential contributors as possible. * Content-related findings

* Respondents were given a list of existing website sections/components and asked to identify those that they "most frequently" access. Unsurprisingly, the most commonly used sections of the site are the official documentation set (produced by the Doc Interest Group), the unofficial documentation set (produced by the community using the website's Dokuwiki functionality, and the mailing list archives. The Web Team had already identified these three content areas as containing almost the entire collective knowledge base of Evergreen.

{@@@INC IN RECO} These three areas - docs, wiki, and mailing list - can ideally be used as three different "tiers" or "phases" of collaboration and community knowledge management. For instance, a discussion about a particular problem or feature may take place on the mailing list, where it appears in the archives. Information that is deemed especially valuable in the mailing list archives might be moved by an enthusiastic website contributor into the unofficial documentation stored on the wiki. Documentation Interest Group members may then regularly review popular wiki pages to determine if they are suitable for inclusion in the "official" documentation where they would most likely be accessed by the largest number of potential users.

* The previous recommendation described a process of curation, by which people in different roles or contexts could manually move knowledge from a limited discussion context into a context accessible to all on the website. However, website visitors increasingly rely on search, especially for finding specific information within a broad topic such as Evergreen. {@@@INC IN RECO} It is critical that all identified information sources are incorporated into a search corpus and that end-user search tools on the site are able to return useful results to user queries. {@@@INC IN RECO} In addition, the website should be structured in a way that optimizes automated indexing by third parties such as Google. This will help ensure that the site is ranked as a valuable resource for those searching with off-site tools.

* When asked which content was easy to find on the EG website, users overwhelmingly and unsurprisingly mentioned the download section and the documentation section. Informative data was gathered, however,

*** Functionality findings

|VI. Recommendations

1. People & Process

EG Advocate role - informal vs. formal? Lead, teach, share, foster,

Website Publishing Committee (Process & Policy)

Netiquette policy
Recognize volunteers

Marketing / Outreach / Awareness Committee

Promote growth in existing user bases
Promote growth in new user bases
	e.g., EG has low penetration in K12 sector.  Outreach committee can embark on focused campaign to reach out to K12 sector and promote EG use, answer questions, etc.

Publication schedules

Encourage widespread participation

• lower and remove barriers whenever possible
• encourage community spirit and intangible incentivization

Accessibility Advocate

Privacy Policy! – the archive change incident

2. Technical

VII. TBD

XXX. Appendices

Appendix A: Community Survey

1. Please give an indication of where you are with Evergreen.

* Skeptic - explicitly unsure of open source development methodology, support models, open source ILS in general, or Evergreen specifically * Potential User - Evaluating or considering moving to Evergreen * Planned Migration - Planning a migration to Evergreen * Migration - Migration in Progress to Evergreen * Production - Currently have production Evergreen systems * Multiple - I work with more than one type of system

2. Is your current or potential Evergreen instance a

* Standalone system with a single library used by a single library organization * Standalone system used by a single multi branch library * Consortium with multiple library organizations on the same Evergreen instance * Statewide consortium * Other (please describe)

3. Is your library a

* Public Library * School (K - 12) * College or University Affiliate * Other Institution

4. What roles do you play on your Evergreen project? (check all that apply)

* Install and Maintain Evergreen * Administer Evergreen system settings * Support Evergreen End Users * Develop Evergreen * Extend Evergreen by integrating with other products * Train Evergreen End Users * Train Evergreen System Administrators * Document Evergreen processes * Translate Evergreen client and documentation into other languages * Make Evergreen software, documentation and web site acessible to as many users as possible. * Provide Evergreen related services to one or more organizations * Manage Evergreen related projects * Other (please describe)

5. Do you participate in any of the following Evergreen related lists (check all that apply)

* General Discussion List * Documentation Discussion List * Technical Discussion List * Evergreen SVN Commit List * OpenSRF SVN Commit List * Evergreen IRC

6. Have you ever contributed to evergreen-ils.org?

* Yes * No

7. If yes, what type of content?

8. If no, why not?

9. Which areas of evergreen-ils.org do you most frequently access (check all that apply)?

* About Us * FAQs * Official Documentation * Process Documentation * Informal Documentation (Wiki) * Mailing Lists * Chat * Calendar * Official Blog * Community Blogs (Planet Evergreen) * Committees and Working Groups * Report Bugs (Launchpad) * Develop Code (code repositories) * Downloads * Search * Any comments?

10. What is easy to find on evergreen-ils.org?

11. Is there anything you're looking for that you couldn't find? What was it?

12. What do you feel is important content for the site? (Respondents were asked to rank each suggested feature as: Very Important, Important, Nice to Have, Extraneous)

* How to access the IRC * How to sign up for Evergreen related mailing lists * Evergreen News and developments * Categorized collection of Evergreen-related resources * Evergreen Service Providers * Evergreen libraries * Individuals in the Evergreen Community * Individuals willing to be contacted about Evergreen related topics (i.e. new users, documentation, system administration) * Information about where to go for assistance * A form to submit questions which is emailed to Evergreen community members/mentors for answering * A one-pager offering a high-level overview of both Evergreen software and the Evergreen community * A guided introduction to Evergreen resources for those considering Evergreen. * Links to a demo “sandbox” implementation of Evergreen * A form requesting an organization be added to the list of Evergreen service providers. * Information on Evergreen software repositories and how to use them * Downloadable test MARC, copy, and user data * Links to on-site and off-site (Launchpad) discussion, specs, or documentation describing features * Links to Documentation Interest Group (DIG) maintained information on how to build, rebuild, and update Evergreen * Links to on-site and off-site information, discussion, and examples of ways to configure Evergreen * General information about open source software * Differences between Evergreen and Koha * Case studies of successful Evergreen migration and implementation projects * Procedures on submitting code to the the community * Documentation and tutorials on Evergreen system architecture * Information about working groups and committees describing people, organizations, teams, and processes involved * Information about Evergreen development projects and future enhancements. * Other (please describe)

13. How important do you consider the following functions on the site? (Respondents were asked to rank each suggested feature as: Very Important, Important, Nice to Have, Extraneous)

* Browse through all website content, organized by categories * Search all content on the website * Search for Evergreen user organization based on certain criteria * Search for service providers based on certain criteria * Search for individuals based on certain criteria * Add resources, including file attachments and/or third-party URLs, to an online resource directory available to other users * Participate in online forums based on specific Evergreen related topics (i.e. System Administration, Migration, Training) * Brainstorm and discuss Evergreen features in a "feature percolator” before optionally submitting to the official Launchpad system * Report a Bug in Launchpad * Maintain official project documentation in a repository apart from the community Evergreen resource/contribution library * Webmasters can easily manage and update the website, including the ability to delegate permissions to other users * Webmasters can easily identify and purge outdated content * Authorized users can easily add and update content * Authorized users can easily generate a report of individual or organizational profiles. * Evergreen Feature Lookup * Evergreen Development and Enhancement project lookup * Other (please specify)

Appendix B: Survey Results (Aggregate)

* See attachment "egwebsite_surveysummary_03172011.pdf"

Appendix C: Complete list of identified user stories

In the list below, each user story is noted as either a content-related or functionality-related requirement. However, some stories, due to their nature, require a specific piece of website functionality along with custom content specific to one or more user groups.

1. ALL USERS

a. Website users can browse through all of the website content, organized by categories. (function)

b. Website users can use a search field to search all of the content on the website. (function)

c. Website users can sign up to get email notifications about certain news items in the Evergreen community. (function)

d. Website users can complete an optional profile describing themselves, their organization, and their organization's use of Evergreen. This will allow website users to find and contact other users with similar background, experience, geographical area, or other shared information. (function)

e. Website users can add resources, including file attachments and/or third-party URLs, to an online resource directory available to other users. (function)

f. Users can find updated information on connecting with EG community via IRC, mailing lists, and other formats. (content)

g. Users can learn about news and developments in the EG community. (content)

2. ADMINISTRATORS

a. Administrators can participate in an online forum to ask questions and share best practices with other Administrators. (function)

b. Administrators can participate in a special online forum (called "the feature percolator") where possible new Evergreen features are brainstormed and discussed before optionally being submitted to the official Launchpad system. (function)

c. Administrators on the website can easily reach the Bug Reporting feature on Launchpad. (function)

3. DEVELOPERS

a. Developers can maintain the official project documentation in a repository apart from the community EG resource/contribution library. (function)

b. Developers can participate in the Administrator "feature percolator" discussion forum mentioned above as well as view the forums in detail. (function)

4. DOCUMENTORS

a. Documentors can maintain the official project documentation in a repository apart from the community EG resource/contribution library. (function)

5. CONSULTANTS

a. Consultants can participate in the Administrator "feature percolator" discussion forum mentioned above as well as view the forums in detail. (function)

6. GOVERNANCE

a. Governance users can easily add content to the website as needed. (function)

b. Governance users can easily generate a report of website users that have completed the user or organizational profiles mentioned above. (function)

7. WEBMASTERS

a. Webmasters can easily manage and update the website, including the ability to delegate permissions to other users. (function)

b. Webmasters can easily identify and purge outdated content. (function)

8. POTENTIALS

a. Potentials can view a "one-pager" offering a high-level overview of both EG software and the EG community. (content)

b. Potentials can view contextual background information on Open Source Software. (content)

c. Potentials are directed to visit a "Considering Evergreen?" web page which offers a guided introduction to EG resources, created by EG community experts. This page presents links to decision-making information in a logical order, aimed at the potential implementer. (content)

d. Potentials can browse or search a categorized collection of resources aimed at potential implementers. (content)

e. Potentials can submit a question via webform which is emailed to EG community members/mentors for answering. (function)

f. Potentials are directed to a third-party demo "sandbox" implementation of Evergreen. (content)

g. Potentials can search for an EG Service Provider based on certain criteria. (functionality/content)

h. Potentials can search for existing EG libraries based on certain criteria. (functionality/content)

i. Potentials can search for individuals in the EG Community based on certain criteria. (functionality/content)

9. SKEPTICS

a. Skeptics can view content created to persuade them why open source is a good idea. (content)

b. Skeptics can view content intended to teach about the differences between Evergreen and Koha. (content)

c. Skeptics can access a list of existing Evergreen users that have volunteered to be contacted to discuss their satisfaction with Evergreen. (function)

d. Skeptics can view curated case studies of successful Evergreen migration and implementation projects. (content)

10. MIGRATION

a. Migration-users can access (browse/search) a hierarchically-categorized collection of resources aimed at libraries performing a migration. (content)

b. Migration-users seeking help for problems encountered during migration are encouraged to join and participate in the general mailing list for assistance. (content)

11. STANDALONE

a. Standalone users can access a page of curated resources specifically tailored for standalone Evergreen libraries, with a focus on issues specific to that group. (content)

2. Standalone users can find and contact other standalone libraries that have adopted Evergreen. (functionality)

12. EXTENDERS and 13. INSTALLERS (total overlap of requirements)

a. Users can find information on Evergreen software repositories and how to use them. (content)

b. Users can download test marc, copy, and user data. (content)

c. Users are easily directed to on-site and off-site (Launchpad) discussion, specs, or documentation describing features. (content)

d. Users are easily directed to DIG-maintained information on how to build, rebuild, and update Evergreen. (content)

e. Users are easily directed to on-site and off-site information, discussion, and examples of ways to configure Evergreen. (content)

14. TRANSLATORS

a. Translators can access a high-level overview of project translation efforts describing people, organizations, teams, and processes involved. (content)

15. ACCESSIBILITY

a. Accessibility users can access a high-level overview of project accessibility efforts describing people, organizations, teams, and processes involved.

Appendix D: