Koha Vs NewGenLib: Trend towards adopting an open source integrated

library system (OSILS) in Indian libraries

T. K. Gireesh Kumar*
Assistant Librarian
Central University of Kerala,
Tejaswini Hills Campus, Periye,
Kasaragod - 671316, Kerala, India
Email: gireesharci@gmail.com

Amrutraj Ravi Benahal**

Associate Librarian
Indian Institute for Human Settlements,
197/36, 2nd Main Road, Sadashivanagar,
Bangalore- 560080, Karnataka, India.
Email : arbenahal@yahoo.co.in

Abstract
Libraries and library professionals are
in the midst of technological restructure to meet
the ever-increasing expectations of its users to
provide instant access to the required
information. One of the basic and quality service
requirements that need to be achieved in the
initial stage of development of any library is
automation, as a means to perform the common
housekeeping operations. The present study
examines the inclining attitude of Indian library
and information science professionals towards
adopting or migrating to Koha rather than
NewGenLib. To support the statement of
‘inclining attitude’ an online survey method was
adopted to identify favored open source
automation system among Indian libraries.
Further, the analysis was limited to Koha and
NewGenLib Open Source Integrated Library
System (OSILS) and the study sought to
establish the reason on why majority of the
Indian library professionals are still considering
using a foreign OSILS rather than an indigenous
one. Study found that the popularity and
adoption rate of an automation system depends
upon its active user base and developer
community, trouble-shooting and customization
support, frequency of training programs,
promotional activities, encouragements from
government, public and private agencies etc.

1
Keywords: Library automation, integrated
library system, open source software, OSILS,
Koha, NewGenLib
Introduction
The advent of various technologies and
their availability in the public domain free of
cost makes library automation cheap, faster and
more effective than ever. The philosophy
behind the concept of Open Source Software
(OSS) is to mutually exchange the skills,
knowledge and expertise to improve the
software for the benefit of the public. Barve
and Dahibhate (2012) and Kumar ( 2016) asserts
that there was a boom in OSS since the starting
of the twentieth century. The landscape of
library automation activities has considerably
been changing in proportion to the nature of its
collection, which necessitates the creation of
next generation Integrated Library System (ILS)
by enhancing the functionalities and operations
of the existing software. Libraries in India that
are already automated with traditional ILS and
the libraries that are not embraced with any
automation activities are rethinking to embark
on a new automation system or migrating from a
legacy system to a new ILS to cope up with the
user expectations and efficient user services.
Webber and Peters (2010) argues that
availability of varied ILS software depends on
satisfying expectations of library user needs and
cost effectiveness An ILS is an information
system having a set of interrelated components
programmed to communicate with each other to
2
perform specific tasks to achieve desired results
(Bilal, 2014). ILSs are identified in different
nomenclature such as Automated Library
System (ALS), Library Management Systems
(LMS), Integrated Library Management System
(ILMS) and Library Automation Software
(LAS) etc. A typical ILS either can be standard
or a software with an open source license and
with the availability of the source code better
quality control can be achieved (Dora, 2008).
The standard software is sold and supported by
the commercial agencies whereas Open Source
Software cannot be sold in a true sense but can
be supported commercially.
There are many Open Source Integrated Library
System (OSILS) available but the installation
and adaptability of such software are mainly
depends on its suitability, utility, authority and
currency in meeting the requirements of
different types of libraries. Even OSILS having
the basic functional modules with varied
features and at this point libraries have to devise
criteria upon which selection has to be made
which would best suit the library operations.
OSILS with emerging technologies have been
evolving into a tool for providing specialized
services especially with the customization
capabilities. Further, OSILS have changed the
dimension of library and information profession
by beginning to add next-generation discovery
interfaces and services. Further ILS in the open
source stream has made inroads into the
activities of libraries, its services and
information management affairs. OSILS reduces
the cost of installation and maintenance and
enhances the efficiency of library services. In
India, OSILS is actively gaining momentum
among the library community. Giri (2011)
argues that many libraries are choosing OSILS
instead of proprietary software mainly for cost
effectiveness and dissatisfaction towards
performance, vendor support. However
successful implementation and maintenance of
any OSILS fundamentally depends on the
attitude of the library professionals and the
adequacy in acquiring the technical work force.
Literature Review
Many comparative studies have been
conducted pertaining to the advantages and
functionalities of open source and proprietary
ILS with special reference to Indian scenario.
Singh and Sanaman (2012) compared the
functionalities of Koha and NewGenLib and
claimed that NewGenLib has better functionality
of modules than Koha. The study also reveals
that cataloguing, circulation and serials control
modules of NewGenLib are better than Koha
and has essential components for digital
library functionalities in terms of
technology, data structure and programming.
Biswas and Paul (2009) on the features and
functionalities of NewGenLib opine that with
little modification it can be a very efficient
OSILS. A study by Haravu (2013) reveals that
NewGenLib is not only functionally excellent
but also especially suitable for the Indian
3
scenario and he further opines that the support
provided by the developers to the users of India
and abroad are exceptional. While conducting a
survey of library automation in college libraries
of Goa Bansode (2008) reveals that the majority
of the college libraries use NewGenLib. But
Madhusudhan and Singh (2015) have a
contradictory view, they argue that NewGenLib
has to be improved in its features or
functionalities in all modules. Pal and Sonker
(2014) are of the similar opinion, he argue that
Koha is stronger than ABCD and NewGenLib in
terms of modules but at the same time he points
out the institutional repository feature in
NewGenLib. A research study conducted by
Muruli and Gireesh Kumar (2014) found that, in
spite of a drastic increase in the adoption rate of
NewGenLib software in Indian libraries when it
was declared as open source software, lack of
technical support and shortage of skilled
manpower to execute installation, maintenance
and customization have been barricades to its
extensive use.
A survey was undertaken with ten participants
who had been using Koha and NewGenLib
found that Koha’s strong community of users,
documentation, wide developer base,
community support are the major reasons for
opting Koha (Giri, 2012). Satpathy and
Maharana (2012) conducted a study to explore
awareness and adoption of open source software
in engineering colleges of Odisha, which
revealed that 27 (18.24%) respondents have the
knowledge about NewGenLib (with 5 having
full knowledge) as compared to Koha with only
10 (6.76%) known respondents. Muruli and
GireeshKumar (2014) conducted an online
survey which revealed that 13% of the libraries
felt that the customization capability is one of
the main reasons for opting NewGenLib.
Lakpathi (2014) conducted a survey in which a
structured questionnaire were sent to understand
the implementation of both commercial and
open source library automation software. Survey
ranked Koha 5th (173 users) over NewGenLib
7th place (148 libraries) and placed e-
Granthalaya as the top software
implemented in India with 1422 users. A study
by Khode and Chandel (2015) reveals that about
80% of the Indian institutions are using Koha as
compared to about 11% of institutions using
NewGenLib. According to Sunil
NewGenLib has all the qualities
considered as the key competitor in the ILS
selection process but recommends
consideration of Koha for the automation
activity in Indian college libraries
improvements in its serial control module.
NewGenLib is not recommended for the
libraries which wholly rely on service and
community support.
Objectives of the Study
The general objective of the study is to
analyze the perceptions of Indian library
professionals on adopting Koha and NewGenLib
software as an integrated library system for their
library.
The specific objectives of the study are as
follows:
 To identify the best suitable OSILS in Indian
libraries on its user’s point of view
 To examine the rationalities on inclining
attitude of Indian library and information
science professionals towards adopting or
migrating to Koha
 To identify the similarities and differences
to be among the factors affecting the rate of
adoption of both Koha and NewGenLib
software
Methodology
(2011), The published literature especially case
to be studies are observed to understand the basic
causes that weaken the wider adoption of
the NewGenLib software. To identify the best
suitable software solution for automating Indian
with libraries, an online survey was conducted among
the libraries using any Free/OSILS. A structured
questionnaire was prepared and sent to the
selected libraries across the country through
google doc, an online tool of Google. There
were 133 responses received for the online
questionnaire from individual libraries that are
using any of the Free/OSILS. Among them a
response rate of 20 for NewGenLib (15%), 89
for Koha (67%), 13 for e-Granthalaya (10%), 6
for no opinion (4%), 3 for ABCD (2%) and 1
4
each for Evergreen and PhPMyLibrary (1%)
from university, college, school and special and
research libraries were received. Analysis was
carried out to identify the factors persuading
Koha than NewGenLib. Questionnaires were
further used to comprehend the attitude of Koha
as well as NewGenLib users towards its
adoption.
Scope and Limitations
Though there are many ILS available as
open source and as commercial software, study
is particularly focuses upon user perceptions of
NewGenLib and Koha. Furhter the study is
limited to Indian scenario and taken account of
professionals who are using either of these two
software packages.
Data Analysis
Best Suitable OSILS
According to the respondents, Koha (67%) is
found to be the most suitable software for Indian
libraries. Moreover, it is found from the survey
that many of the Koha installations have
commenced operation since 2008. Further,
NewGenLib software is selected to be the
second best suitable software (15%) for Indian
libraries which shows a drastic uplift in its
adoption from the time it was declared as open
source software and followed by e-Granthalaya
(10%) and ABCD (2%) followed by Evergreen
and PhPMyLibrary (each 1% ). A significant
number of respondents (4%) were not able to
provide the name of single software, which
would be best suitable for Indian scenario
(Figure-1).
No Opinion,
PhpMyLibrar 4%
ABCD, 2% Evergreen,
y, 1%
1%
e-
NewGenLib, Granthalaya,
15% 10%

Koha, 67%
The research study attempted to identify
the best suitable OSILS among Indian libraries
on its user’s point of view. Even though much
integrated library systems are available for
ABCD e-Granthalaya Evergreen
complete library automation in the software Koha NewGenLib PhpMyLibrary
No Opinion
industry, few are extensively being used in
Indian libraries in both open source and Figure 1: Best suitable OSILS
commercial ILS. The features and functions of
The analysis shows that though Koha software is
integrated library systems need to be analyzed
developed by a foreign country, majority of the
before its adoption to determine whether the
respondents preferred Koha as the best suitable
software meets the requirements of the specific
software for Indian libraries irrespective of the
library. Respondents were asked to indicate the
types and sizes of libraries. The software has
best suitable OSILS in Indian context.

5
been a very successful OSILS comparing to been implemented in bigger libraries like
other software of similar kind. However the rate Bangalore University Library, Karnataka,
of adoption of NewGenLib is comparatively low Maulana Azad National Urdu University,
in Indian libraries. It is true that the developer Hyderabad, IIT Jodhpur, Osmania University,
has instituted several initiatives like the Hyderabad, Central Institute of Plastics
NewGenLib adoption program, offering free Engineering & Technology, Chennai, University
data conversion, maintaining a dedicated OSS College of Arts Library,Tumkur University,
team for providing quick responses to user Karnataka, Central Library of Sree Chaitanya
queries, but all the developmental work is done Institute of Technological Sciences, Hyderabad,
only by the original developer (i.e. Verus SDMIMD Library,Mysore, Indira Gandhi Delhi
Solutions Private Limited). Technical University for Women (IGDTUW)
Library, NewDelhi, , Karnataka State Open
NewGenLib University, Karnataka, TKR College of
Until January 2008, NewGenLib Engineering & Technology, Hyderabad and
software was licensed under commercial ILS Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)
and then made as open source ILS under Hyderabad, Presidency University, Kolkata
GNUGeneral Public License. Development of having collection over 3.5 lakh etc.
the software was accomplished by the
collaboration of Verus Solutions Pvt. Koha
Ltd.,(VSPL), a software company and Kesavan Koha, a software product of Katipo
Institute of Information and Knowledge Communications, New Zealand released under
Management (KIIKM), a professional trust. General Public License (GPL) in 1999 and one
NewGenLib allows the configuration of form of the full featured integrated library systems
letters typically used in libraries. NewGenLib is available in open source platform. Koha is
useful not only as automation tool but also for widely adopted and supported by various
creating institutional repositories since it libraries throughout the country for many years.
comprises all the functions and features similar The software is written in Pearl language and
to Koha including web 2.0 applications. As an works independent with platform such as
ILS, NewGenLib comprises functional modules Windows, Linux and Unix. Koha is a suitable
such as acquisitions, technical processing, serials OSILS for any type of libraries and consists of
management, circulation, administration and functional modules to perform basic
OPAC. The software is featured with automated housekeeping operations such as acquisition,
alert services such as email and Short Message circulation, cataloguing, online public access
Service (SMS). NewGenLib has successfully catalogue (OPAC), serials control, patron

6
management etc. Koha has received many
recognition and awards for being a widely used
software and recently Finalist Open Source
Software Project New Zealand Open Source
Awards in 2014. In 2008, Government of Kerala
declared Koha as the official software for
computerization of libraries under its control and
also Pondicherry University has adopted Koha
in the course curriculum of Master of Library
and Information Sciences (MLISc). University
of Mysore implemented Koha OSILS in their
main library and other 58 libraries under the
University during 2011. Further in 2015, The
Kerala State Library Council (KSLC) embarked
on computerizing all the affiliated public
libraries using Koha software. Mahatma Gandhi
University, Kerala, Indian Institute of Space
Science and Technology, Kerala; IISER Mohali,
IISER Bhopal, IIT Mandi, IIM Ahmedabad are
few among major institutions successfully
adopted Koha software.
NewGenLib and Koha: As Two minds thinking
one?
As an Open Source Integrated Library
System (OSILS), both NewGenLib and Koha
shows similarities in many features and
functionalities and the differences are marginal
in the core activities. The source code of both
the software is freely available under the GNU
General Public License (GPL) which creates the
flexibility to manipulate the code to suit special
needs of the user. Both NewGenLib and Koha
are web based, platform independent ILS
7
package, however Koha works better with Linux
platform. Both Koha and NewGenLib are
platform neutral and both software can be used
on different modes such as on a single computer,
institutional LAN or WAN, consortium via the
worldwide web (Haravu, 2009). Local variation
can be retained at users’ convenience and both
the software has commercial vendor offerings.
User community support is available for
resolving queries and issues for both Koha and
NewGenLib and timely technical support can be
obtained through in-house experts or devoted
companies that offer services. These software
makes it possible to carry on with the existing IT
infrastructure there by withstands the
obsolescence of technology. Also makes it easy
for the evaluation as OSILS are always available
for trial. Reduction in maintenance cost is
possible to a great extent in both the software
since an in-house IT expert can monitor the
functions. Libraries can adopt and continue to
use any of this software since there is no risk of
ceased services in both the cases. Koha as well
as NewGenLib uses open standards and freely
available supporting applications which gives
the users independence to modify with lower
cost or even switch over easily. Both Koha and
NewGenLib work on Windows and Linux, and
are licensed under GNU-General Public License
(GNU-GPL).
Major reasons for opting Koha than NewGenLib
One of the respondents of the survey
who is using NewGenLib compared its
advantages with Koha and remarked that
NewGenLib does not have a vibrant and open
user community similar to Koha however the
numbers of NewGenLib users in India are
sizable. According to another respondent,
NewGenLib is not organizing much seminars
and courses like the protagonists of Koha unless
a library requests such courses or events.
Another respondent opined that the Koha can be
installed by the user himself with the help of
step-by-step documentation, live DVDs and
volunteer community support. However, even
though it is nominal, NewGenLib charges some
annual maintenance charges (AMC). "Many
professionals extend their free support through
both online and offline modes to help the users
in the area of customization and trouble-
shooting support to Koha. All trouble-shooting
and customization support of NewGenLib rests
with the parent company", a respondent
annotated. The other major reasons cited by the
respondents to prefer Koha to NewGenLib are
summarized as: Koha's continuously updating
and improving its features and functionalities,
widely adopted, larger and very
community of user group and developer group,
high user satisfaction with its modules and
functions, additional functionalities
characteristics of advanced next generation
software including web 2.0 features, efficiency
in managing e-resources, Unicode support,
support to barcode technology,
technology, self checkout and inventory control,
availability of virtual book shelf, provision for
retrieving different kind of reports and statistics
via report wizard or SQL or statistic wizard or
predefined reports, support for multi-branch
libraries and multi-users, availability in different
languages, richness in providing quality
documentations in the public domain etc.
NewGenLib Vs Koha: what makes the
difference?
Koha was developed outside India,
much of its modules and workflows are based on
standards and practices relevant to western
countries. Koha provides more flexibility in its
use to its clients and is more transparent
compared to NewGenLib. NewGenLib software
is an entirely made-in- India product, which is
now running in over 30 countries. (Sunil, 2011)
argues that the performance of NewGenLib is
satisfactory and can bring best practice in the
college libraries of India. Apart from the basic
functionalities such as acquisition, circulation,
OPAC and MIS Reports, NewGenLib offers
some advanced features like adoption of RFID,
integration with Twitter and Gmail for sending
active messages regarding transactions, RSS feed in
OPAC, incorporation of institutional repositories
etc. Koha software is written in Perl language
and where as NewGenLib is programmed with
JAVA. Further, NewGenLib supports all the
metadata standards whereas Koha supports
MARC 21 and UNIMARC standards only.
RFID NewGenLib gives better interoperability than
Koha and can have impact on the new role of
libraries and it is also compliant with the
8
reference management software like Zotero. commercial companies that have promoted Koha
NewGenLib was developed keeping in view of in India. Moreover, Library Associations like
the common workflows and practices in India Bengal Library Association, Kolkata provides
and other South Asian countries (Haravu, paid support to Koha software.
2009).
 Support from government: The growth and
However the rate of adoption of
development and the rate of adoption is highly
NewGenLib is comparatively low in Indian
influenced by the support of the local
libraries. The possible reasons which enhance
government or a funding agency run by the
the rate of adoption could be summarized as
government. Support for NewGenLib software
follows:
from governmental sources and publicly funded
institutions arelimited. Koha was supported by
 Active user community: One of the major
NewZealand Government through its
concerns users often confront with OSILS is
consortium. Kerala government has declared
difficulty in getting timely support in problem
Koha to be a recognized OSILS which is
solving and trouble-shooting. Koha has an active
considered for the automation of all government
user community both in India and in other parts
libraries in Kerala (Kumar, 2008).
of the world, but at the same time NewGenLib
lack such a vibrant and open community of
 Public and private support: Support from
users.
the public or a private agency to promote the use
of an OSILS makes a huge difference. Many
 Adequate training programs: Community
commercial companies came forward to provide
members of Koha organize frequent training
paid support to libraries to adopt Koha in India.
programs and courses on various aspects of the
NewGenLib is getting an outstanding private
software; on the other hand there are hardly any
support from a multinational company, viz.,
workshops and training programmes on
Bosch Industries.
NewGenLib.

 Cost effective: Commercial firms charge

 Promotional activities through
Annual Maintenance Charges (AMC) for
government/commercial agencies: Some
hosting and maintaining the software. Many
proactive Indian users of Koha have taken
fellow library professionals have been extending
voluntary initiatives to promote and distribute
their help to install Koha locally in their
Koha which encourage more libraries to adopt
respective libraries and in addition self-
Koha software. Also, there are many
installation bootable CD and DVDs are released

9
which has given library professionals an ample
scope for learning and exploring Koha. In this
context, NewGenLib lacks such awareness
among the LIS professionals.
 Technial support and customizations:
Trouble-shooting and customization support can
be either commercial or community based. Koha
has a rich community of users and online
platforms to provide timely support in providing
instructions to perform the trouble shooting and
customization activities. However, there are
commercial companies in India which offer paid
services for Koha. Unlike Koha, the activities
pertaining to the trouble-shooting and
customization support of the NewGenLib
software is performed by the developer of the
software and most of the time, which is done
online on demand via remote access.
 Succeeding developments: Responsibility for
further development of NewGenLib software is
completely rests with the parent company. But
in case of Koha, new development, testing and
its deployment is done by the supporting
communities including individual volunteers,
companies or libraries.
Findings
Lack of awareness and investment of
time to self-learn the software is one of the
biggest challenges which has reduced the
adoption of OSILS in Indian libraries. Analysis
of responses from the survey shows that there is
10
a drastic uplift in the rate of adoption of Koha
software among Indian libraries during the last
decade. The major reasons for the respondents
recognize adoption of Koha compared to other
software of similar kind are, its advantageous
features viz. cost effectiveness, software control,
ability for customization, developments, ease of
use and community support from all over the
world. However, (Agrawal, 2015) argues that
NewGenLib has become competitive to Koha
and even better than Koha with respect to
platform dependency and cataloguing module.
Further, NewGenLib should release updated
versions frequently similar to Koha. The
functional modules such serial control,
administration, user documentation etc. need to
be considerably improved in NewGenLib
software. Koha’s presence with support services
both in the west and increasingly in the
developing countries will be a serious challenge
to NewGenLib’s adaptability in India and
abroad.
Conclusion
In a knowledge society where
information user has become more informed and
there is a high expectation towards library
services. Library automation has not only
become an important step towards efficient
library services but also a tool for efficiently
managing the available manpower. OSILS
provide a cost effective and competitive solution
for library automation and in addition many
private agencies are offering customizing,
hosting and maintaining services on commercial
basis. Giri (2012) argues that, in India library
professionals are good at adopting OSILS in
their libraries but they lack in contributing
towards software development. In India, Koha is
becoming more popular OSILS mainly because
of the expanding user base, support,
documentation and frequent workshops for
installing and using Koha. On the other hand,
Shivakumaraswamy and Narendra (2014) argues
for the need to have more online and offline
support about training, maintenance and
technical help. Besides, Muruli and Gireesh
Kumar (2014) asserts that some of the major
issues for adopting OSILS by NewGenLib users
in India are lack of technical knowledge and
support, skilled staff and promotional activities.
The development, deployment, updating
and upgrading, marketing and support of an
OSILS require considerable ongoing investment
of skills and funds. Koha was fortunate for being
References
1. Agrawal PR, 2015. NewGenLib : A new
generation open source library automation
software. In Advanced applications of ICT in
libraries, ed. Veer, D.K., pp. 161–171. Agri-
Biovet Press, New Delhi.
2. Bansode SY and Periera S, 2008. A survey of
library automation in college libraries in Goa
state, India. Library Philosophy and Practice
Online
[http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/205/
11
incubated by a forward-looking consortium of
the New Zealand Government. After, its
development many commercial companies
coming forward to provide paid support to
libraries. It was unfortunate that there was little
or no encouragement for start-ups in India when
NewGenLib development had begun in 1995.
Two individuals: one an experienced librarian
and another a Java programmer began the
company (Verus Solutions Pvt. Ltd.) which took
on the task of developing the NewGenLib. After
about five years of its development, it was sold
as commercial software. Thereafter, it was
declared open source under GNU public license.
The situation has not changed much. More
adoptions and long-term sustainability of
NewGenLib, to some extent, depend on the
support that it gets from Government, as well as
publicly funded institutions such as state and
central universities.
3. Barve S. and Dahibhate NB, 2012. Open
source software for library services. DESIDOC
Journal of Library & Information Technology,
Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 401–408.
4. Bilal D, 2014. Library automation: core
concepts and practical systems analysis.
England: Libraries Unlimited. pp.1- 279
5. Biswas G. and Paul D, 2009. A study on the
open source integrated library management
software: special reference to NewGenLib.
Proceedings of the National Seminar of ICSSR,
June 25-26, 2009. Bhai Gurdas Library, Guru 11. Khode S and Chandel S.S, 2015. Adoption

Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, 512– of open source software in India. DESIDOC

524. Journal of Library and Information Technology,

Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 30–40.
6. Dora M, Maharana B and Jena S, 2008. Open
source movement in Indian libraries: An 12. Kumar D, 2016. NewGenLib: open source

analytical study. In: Kataria S, Nigam B S and software from India. Indian Journal of Research,

Shukla R K, eds. Proceedings of the Vol. 5, No. 2, pp. 232–233.

International Symposium on Emerging Trends

13. Kumar V.V, 2008. Government of Kerala
and Technologies in Libraries and Information
decides to use Koha, LIS-Forum. Online [
Services, 2008. JIIT University, Noida:.KBDP,
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/pipermail/lis-forum/2008-
181-189
August/007929.html]

7. Giri R, 2011. Use of open source software in

the learning resource centre of Indira Gandhi 14. Lakpathi K, 2014. Status of library

Institute of Technology: A case study. Annals of automation in India. International Journal of

Library and Information Studies, Vol.58, No. 1, Library and Information Studies, Vol. 4, No. 4,

pp. 41-48. pp. 77–83.

8. Giri R, 2012. NewGenLib 3: an integrated 15. Madhusudhan M and Singh V, 2015.

open source library management system that Evaluation of select library automation

makes your library visible in Web. Library Hi propriatry softwares: Libsys, Virtua and

Tech News, Vol. 29, No. 10, pp. 4–12. Troodon. Library Progress (International), Vol.
35, No. 1, pp. 47.
9. Haravu L.J, 2009. Comparison of two open
source integrated library systems (ILS): Koha 16. Muruli and Gireesh Kumar T K, 2014.

(Version. 3.0) and NewGenLib (Version. 2.2 Attitude of Newgenlib software users towards

Beta). Online the adoption of open source. International

[http://www.verussolutions.biz/files/Whitepaper Journal of Digital Library Services, Vol. 4, No.

2.doc] 4, pp. 112–125.

10. Haravu L.J, 2013. NewGenLib. LIS-Forum. 17. Pal S K and Sonker BP, 2014. Open sources

Online [http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/pipermail/lis- software for modern libraries : A comparative

forum/2013-April/014966.html study of ABCD, Koha and Newgenlib.

12
Information Access in Digital Libraries. New
Delhi: New India Publishing
18. Satpathy S K and Maharana RK, 2012.
Awareness and adoption of open source
software among LIS professionals
engineering colleges of Odisha. DESIDOC
20. Singh M and Sanaman G, 2012. Open
source integrated library management systems.
The Electronic Library, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 809–
832.
of
21. Sunil M V, 2011. Importance‐Performance

Journal of Library and Information Technology, Analysis (IPA) of OSILS products. KELPRO

Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 421–426. Bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp.56-74

19. Shivakumaraswamy K N and Narendra, B 22. Webber D and Peters A, 2010. Integrated

K, 2014. NewGenLib@BGSIT library and library systems: Planning, selecting, and

information center: A case study. Journal of implementing. Santa Barbara, CA: Libraries

International Academic Research for Unlimited, pp.1-220

Multidisciplinary, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 234–240.

13