Old:Repository Software

This outdated page was created to discuss existing and desired software for a digital data repository and metadata registry.

Existing software for digital data

 * Dspace (Notes)
 * EPrints (Notes)
 * Fedora (Notes)
 * OpenContext (Notes)
 * Virtual Data Center (Notes)

Evaluations &amp; Comparisons

 * A Technology Analysis of Repositories and Services
 * looked at DSpace, Fedora, DigitalCommons, JSR 170, OKI OSID, ECL
 * Final report
 * Technical Evaluation of selected Open Source Repository Solutions
 * looked at DSpace, Fedora, EPrints, ARNO, CDSware, i-TOR
 * Open Society Institute - A Guide to Institutional Repository Software
 * looks at Archimede, ARNO, CDSware, DSpace, Eprints, Fedora, i‐Tor, MyCoRe, OPUS
 * contains an extensive feature-vs-software table at the end

A quote from Hussein Suleman in an answer on a thread on DSpace vs. Fedora: "dspace provides a simple installable package with a user interface, some workflow management, its own repository, elements to support preservation, etc. fedora is all about the repository and management of items in it. technically, one could modify dspace to use fedora rather than its own repository ... so it may not be a choice but an "and". you would choose fedora if you wanted to integrate a repository into a larger application. you would choose dspace if you wanted a one-stop-shop digital library system."


 * After Code4Lib 2014, dleehr investigated Hydra/Fedora by installing them and running through a tutorial on the GitHub project page
 * wiki at https://github.com/projecthydra/hydra/wiki/Dive-into-Hydra
 * Simple to get it installed. Rails gems all the way down, including installing fedora inside a jetty.
 * Tutorial is definitely geared towards libraries - with entities of books/authors
 * Introduces concepts of models and datastreams, appears to be in the mapping of Hydra models to Fedora objects
 * A nice development environment, similar to scaffolding in rails
 * There does not appear to be a submission system built in, but there may be a related project.

Requirements versus software matrix
Key:


 * X = has feature
 * / = can accommodate feature, but may need some work
 * O = does not have feature
 * (blank) = needs more research

note 1: We may not need to represent relationships explicitly in the repository. These relationships can simply be represented in metadata, and handled by the normal ID resolution system.

Recommendation
Recommendation order: DSpace, FEDORA, Virtual Data Center --User:Jdube@nc.rr.com 15:05, 20 December 2006 (EST)

Some of the key reasons:


 * 1) DSpace
 * 2) *most likely to be out-of-the-box, up-and-running quickly
 * 3) *many existing implementations
 * 4) *appears to have user interface tools
 * 5) Fedora
 * 6) *many existing implementations
 * 7) *component toolkit that may be robust, but would require further software choices, implementations, configurations, etc.
 * 8) Virtual Data Center
 * 9) *only one implementation (Harvard/MIT/Michigan group) that I could determine
 * 10) *focused on repurposing of (soc sci) data
 * 11) *works with DDI

Note: All are open source, largely if not completely standard-compliant, etc.; all appear to be workable solutions that might work well in the long-run.

Note: this section is more or less taken from an email from Jed from Dec 20, 2006 --Hlapp 23:50, 6 January 2007 (EST)