> It's not as robust as normal commercial library systems software
There are two things wrong here :)
a) it is a commercial library system. I get paid to work on it, to host it, to support it. So do many other people and companies. That's about as commercial as you can get.
b) libraries tend to like it more than their previous proprietary system because it is more robust. It doesn't crash (unless you overload it, but it handles that better than many other systems), it doesn't lose branches for days at a time for no good reason, doing repeated Z39.50 queries against it doesn't cause it to die *cough*voyager*cough*. In addition, it looks nice and is nice to use. Have you seen the public catalogues on proprietary systems? They are almost always horrifically ugly, and do things like have sessions in the URL, so you can't send links to someone else, or use multiple tabs reliably.
Koha is not "good enough because you're poor", although it fits that niche too. It's just good because it has more developers, more libraries involved with its development, and is not marketing-driven. Hell, it was totally web-based in 2000, most other ILS software isn't even now.
> Liblime Fauxha.
I'm stealing that. I hope you don't mind :)