Hi James,

I'm really new to this list, and more generally to Uk (moving this week to London!), but having worked for French museum I may bring some outsider point of view on this. 

There's a really interesting project in France where an institution "pushed forward" an open source tool.

It's the national library, the Bnf. They opened http://data.bnf.fr , a really extensive open data meta-collection, linking a lot of disparate databases, including Gallica (the online library).

The open source tool used is called cubic web. It's the foundation, and bnf built on that. 

It's an excellent example of a merged work between an innovative startup, a designer or two, some academics and a big institution. Good mix !


Regards,

Francois Alliot - Interaction designer
http://nerial.co.uk/portfolio -@nerial

Le 17 oct. 2013 à 09:18, James Morley <[log in to unmask]> a écrit :

> Great discussion and some really interesting, well-argued points.
> 
> Related to this, I'd be fascinated to hear of examples where
> organisations have not just used open source, but have contributed
> back to the core technology in the form of modules/plugins/themes etc
> or even the underlying platform. I'd especially like to see examples
> beyond the likes of 'install this plugin and you can put our
> collections on your blog' (although those are interesting too!)
> ---
> James Morley
> www.jamesmorley.net / @jamesinealing
> www.whatsthatpicture.com / @PhotosOfThePast
> www.apennypermile.com / @APennyPerMile
> 
> 
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 9:55 PM, Nick Sharp
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Thank you all so much for the incredibly helpful and insightful advice.
>> I'm overwhelmed by how supportive the MCG community is!
>> 
>> What I think I've found is that it's not as cut-and-dried an issue as I
>> thought. Having been brought up very much in the Wordpress/Drupal 'open
>> source is good, proprietary bad' orthodoxy, I'm a bit thrown by the
>> possibility that another solution could fit our needs better. We've been
>> pleased with our agency partner so far, and they've done some incredibly
>> clever thinking about UX, future integration phases, organisational design
>> for the digital age etc. I don't anticipate us not being in a
>> medium-to-long term relationship with them. But I want to make sure the
>> technology choice is as future-proof as possible. Which involves a bit of
>> wishful crystal-ball gazing...
>> 
>> I've been struck by the 'Open Source triangle' (developed by JP Rangaswami
>> -
>> http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2007/08/04/build-versus-buy-versus-opensource
>> / - the whole post is interesting) which suggests:
>> 
>> For common problems use Opensource.
>> For rare problems use Buy.
>> For unique problems use Build.
>> 
>> 
>> I suppose we need to work out how unique (or even rare…) the things we're
>> trying to do really are, technically…
>> 
>> Thanks again for all your help and advice - and do please let me know if
>> you have any further thoughts, it's been incredibly helpful.
>> 
>> And if you're in London, do pop by and drop in for a coffee!
>> 
>> Best wishes
>> Nick
>> @emuroad
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 16/10/2013 18:27, "Janet Brunckhorst" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Nick
>>> 
>>> This is a tough choice, and one I had to make a couple of years back. I
>>> know a lot of people think I made a crazy decision, which is why I
>>> thought
>>> I'd share my perspective :)
>>> 
>>> A little background: Prior to this role, I worked on a major site
>>> relaunch
>>> (Lonely Planet) that used heavily customized Drupal. The team was
>>> amazing,
>>> but the CMS was never quite what we needed (it was Drupal 5, though...).
>>> I
>>> then worked at a startup that had a custom-built Ruby CMS. I couldn't
>>> understand why they would build something custom, and asked the devs lots
>>> of questions about their decision. Their insights, and my previous
>>> experience, made me think that this was a far less clear-cut area than I
>>> had previously thought.
>>> 
>>> We relaunched the Asian Art Museum website in February this year (with a
>>> partial launch in November 2012). We went with a custom Ruby CMS. We do
>>> not have an internal team (it's me, and I'm not a developer). I'm in San
>>> Francisco, so there are plenty of dev shops around (as there are in
>>> London). I deliberately set out to be technology agnostic because I
>>> wanted
>>> to focus on finding the right team to work with first. In my previous
>>> experience, picking the right team had turned out to be way more
>>> important
>>> than picking a specific technology solution (the right team should of
>>> course be able to make sound technology recommendations). I also wanted a
>>> local team, because of the nature of the project and the stakeholders
>>> involved. I still believe that these two criteria were critical for us.
>>> 
>>> Your pros and cons are pretty much the same list I came up with. As we
>>> went through the decision-making process, I spoke to a bunch of people
>>> I'd
>>> worked with previously or met in the museum community, from Ruby devs to
>>> CIOs to Drupal zealots, to sense-check that we weren't missing some huge
>>> advantage or disadvantage either way. I came to the conclusion that
>>> off-the-shelf vs custom wasn't really the crucial choice for us; either
>>> one could do the job. Neither was going to be significantly cheaper for
>>> what we wanted. They both had advantages and disadvantages. So my initial
>>> criteria around people and their ability to work with us and deliver a
>>> great product remained front of mind. We had proposals from companies
>>> that
>>> worked with a variety of technologies; some who specialized, some who
>>> would build on a bunch of different platforms according to need. The one
>>> we chose is a Ruby shop. We could not be happier with them and the work
>>> they've done.
>>> 
>>> We are incredibly happy with our CMS. We have just completed a Phase 3
>>> project with additional improvements. We work in Agile with our
>>> dev/design
>>> team, and maintain a backlog between projects to keep track of our
>>> desired
>>> improvements; this is working really well. We are considering
>>> implementing
>>> a maintenance contract/retainer to ensure that we have the ability to
>>> make
>>> minor changes, as our next major project will be several months away.
>>> 
>>> You're right that we could not extend our system in-house. We couldn't
>>> really extend any system in-house, though; we don't have plans to build a
>>> dev team in the near future. So that was less of a consideration for us,
>>> and made it even more important that we be able to build partnerships
>>> that
>>> could last.
>>> 
>>> OK, that was a really long way of saying: "people, process, technology -
>>> which would you choose?".
>>> 
>>> Hope that helps - happy to chat more off-list if you want!
>>> 
>>> cheers
>>> Janet
>>> 
>>> Janet Brunckhorst
>>> Manager of Web and Digital Media
>>> 
>>> Asian Art Museum
>>> 200 Larkin Street
>>> San Francisco, CA  94102
>>> 415.581.3667
>>> asianart.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> From:   Nick Sharp <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To:     [log in to unmask]
>>> Date:   10/16/2013 04:02 AM
>>> Subject:        [MCG] Benefits of custom-built CMS vs adapting
>>> off-the-shelf - your experience?
>>> Sent by:        Museums Computer Group <[log in to unmask]>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi MCGers,
>>> 
>>> Firstly quickly wanted to introduce myself ­ I started at the beginning of
>>> September as Head of Digital here at the Royal Academy. Do get in touch to
>>> say hello!
>>> 
>>> I'm working on a website redevelopment project here, and I wanted to
>>> canvass opinion on our technology choice. Our technology partners are
>>> suggesting building a bespoke CMS (primarily using Ruby and other open
>>> source technologies), rather than adapting a CMS (like Drupal, for the
>>> sake of argument).
>>> 
>>> I've worked with both solutions in the past, but I wondered if any MCGers
>>> had any thoughts based on their experience in this sector.
>>> 
>>> My concern is that, when I've worked with a custom CMS before ­ for
>>> example, GOV.UK ­ it's involved a large internal development team,
>>> something we currently lack.  I don't want to tie us into a relationship
>>> with one supplier (as with proprietary systems of old), but at the same
>>> time, assuming the language and technology are well-supported by the
>>> developer community, a custom CMS will offer us a lighter, more elegant
>>> solution.
>>> 
>>> Does anyone have any experience of making similar choices, or how it has
>>> worked out for them?  Realise this is quite a broad question and brings up
>>> loads of associated questions, both philosophical and practical. But would
>>> be interested in your thoughts.
>>> 
>>> Couple of thoughts below:
>>> 
>>> Benefits of a custom CMS
>>> 
>>> * we can build exactly the right CMS for the RA, we don't have to bend an
>>> off the shelf product into shape
>>> * it will be faster, the database structure is optimised for the RA, an
>>> off the shelf CMS database is designed for flexibility
>>> * we can design a more dynamic system, unconstrained by the particular
>>> usage model an off the shelf CMS would bring
>>> 
>>> Drawbacks of a custom CMS
>>> 
>>> * extending the system will require more in depth knowledge, currently not
>>> existing in-house
>>> * Could tie the RA into a difficult/expensive issue if technology moves in
>>> a different direction
>>> 
>>> Benefits of an off the shelf CMS
>>> 
>>> * a community of developers exist that understand how to use it
>>> * can be extended easily to add functionality
>>> * includes robust code for handling classic content management tasks
>>> * powerful
>>> 
>>> Drawbacks of an off the shelf CMS
>>> 
>>> * upgrades to an of the shelf CMS could have unforeseen consequences for
>>> the system
>>> * an off the shelf CMS represents a retrospective view of the trend in
>>> content management. In contrast we are trying to build a future facing
>>> approach for the RA.
>>> * might cost money to buy a licence on a recurring basis
>>> * the CMS design might go out of date, or be superseded by better designs.
>>> * complex, lots of features are included which are not needed by the RA
>>> * Could prove expensive to build and customise for RA requirements
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks!
>>> 
>>> Nick Sharp @emuroad
>>> 
>>> Head of Digital
>>> 
>>> Royal Academy of Arts
>>> Burlington House
>>> Piccadilly
>>> London  W1J 0BD
>>> 
>>> 020 7300 5803 | 07718 236871
>>> 
>>> www.royalacademy.org.uk <http://www.royalacademy.org.uk/>
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The Royal Academy of Arts is a registered charity under Registered Charity
>>> Number 1125383 and is also registered as a company limited by guarantee in
>>> England and Wales under Company Number 6298947. Registered office:
>>> Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, W1J 0BD.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The Royal Academy of Arts is a registered charity under Registered
>>> Charity
>>> Number 1125383 and is also registered as a company limited by guarantee
>>> in
>>> England and Wales under Company Number 6298947. Registered office:
>>> Burlington House, Piccadilly, London, W1J 0BD.
>>> 
>>> ****************************************************************
>>>      website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>      Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>     Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>> [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>> ****************************************************************
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ****************************************************************
>>>      website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>>      Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>>     Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>>> [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>>> ****************************************************************
>> 
>> 
>> ****************************************************************
>>       website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>>       Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>>      Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
>> [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
>> ****************************************************************
> 
> ****************************************************************
>       website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
>       Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
>      Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
> [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
> ****************************************************************

****************************************************************
       website:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/
       Twitter:  http://www.twitter.com/ukmcg
      Facebook:  http://www.facebook.com/museumscomputergroup
 [un]subscribe:  http://museumscomputergroup.org.uk/email-list/
****************************************************************