III | How do other ILS systems handle prioritization?
| System | Description | Provided by |
|---|---|---|
| Alma | Ideas and requests for extension or improvements could be suggested via Idea Exchange. Members (IGeLU, ELUNA) can vote (100 points) for improvements, enhancements and ideas through NERS (New Enhancements Request System). /MT | Ex Libris |
| Coral | "There is no formal ranking system as far as I’m aware. New features/development by libraries/vendors are proposed to the Steering Committee, who decides if it is a good idea to include in the code-base." /Community-member /MWi | Open source |
| LBS | JIRA via hosting provider (GBV) | OCLC |
| Sinopia | The project used Zenhub in the past, but now Michelle Futorick is recommending a tool called Miro. From MIchelle in an email: "Miro can integrate with Jira for tickets that need prioritization. Or you can do freeform with "stickies" and lots of ways of grouping and voting and commenting/reacting to things." --jsamples | |
Summon, RefWorks, RapidILL | Idea Exchange is the branded name, but I don't know what system is used – jsamples
| Ex Libris |
| Voyager | We had no input into prioritization; support not good | Voyager (before they became a part of Ex Libris) |
| Koha | If understood correctly; Suggestions are entered by interested institution in BugZilla. There is an "upvote" function, but no real ranking/voting used. Development is mostly made/financed by the institution(s) that need a feature. The code is then admitted to general Koha release if QA-team agrees (here open voting may occur)./MWi | |
| Sierra | A couple of years ago: Customers received lists with very small features that we could vote on. No big picture as I remember it. /MWi | Innovative (before they became part of Ex Libris) |
| QuickMARC *In FOLIO | This may not be robust enough to support the community, I have only been a responder once – jsamples | Mentimeter, |
| LD4P2 Cohort | FunRetro | Stanford University |