Talk:Greenstone (software)

Untitled
To keep this article, there must be sources showing its notability, which is this case would be a demonstration of its importance, as shown by third party independent sources. DGG 21:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, Greenstone is certainly worth a Wikipedia page. On that page, however, it must be noted that Greenstone uses a unique macro file format and syntax. As a result, to work well with Greenstone requires a significant amount of spin-up time during which the librarian learns how to interact with the files and how they work together. Once implemented, the software is quite robust and effective -- but given alternatives like dspace and eprints, there seems to be little reason to use it. - t

The fourth paragraph ends rather abruptly with an incomplete sentence, which I am sure is a cut-and-paste-in-a-haste error. Please fix. -- AnonCoward —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.69.15.12 (talk) 08:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)