Richard Hosking wrote: > I might be willing to put up some money, but not if "representatives" of > various organizations are involved. Their loyalties are divided - are > they for the business/venture or their organization?
Yes I nearly choked as I wrote ADGP on the list, but it seems to me that success in these projects relates very much to the size of the sympathetic social network that supports it. By and large I don't think a group of enthusiasts can pull it off. Getting groups with a bit more leverage involved from the start would be desirable from my point of view. Tony > > R > > Tony Eviston wrote: > >> >> Daydreaming...... >> >> A hard-to-please aussie GP is disillusioned with the available EHR >> software choices. >> He/she is not so worried about its cost, or even its functionality but >> more about its closed architecture and the fact that half of the >> programming effort seems to be dedicated to locking in users rather >> than fixing bugs or creating creating an extensible platform. >> >> The GP finds himself in a position to provide some seed funding for an >> effort towards a more open alternative. Lets say $10,000 for arguments >> sake. >> Concerned about the fate of such efforts in the past he seeks advice >> about a suitable development pathway from his I.T. literate friends. >> As a conversation starter our GP explains that he had the following in >> mind when he conceived the idea: >> >> (1) that before proceeding to step two he wanted pledges of an >> additional $40,000 from others of similar vision >> (2) that a legal entity be set up in a suitable way to protect the >> interests of the donors, but that the entity be not for profit from >> the outset. >> (3) that the directorate of this entity will comprise at least one of >> each of the following: a practicing GP with demonstrated IT knowledge, >> an invited medical-IT consultant, a representative of ADGP , a >> representative of ACRRM, a representative of RACGP. >> (4) that 12 months should pass until Step 5, during which time >> extensive consultation will occur Australia wide involving any GPs who >> wishes to make a submissions, and invited input from a wide range of >> groups including pharmacy, allied health and other professional >> organizations. Further donations will be solicited from individuals >> and organizations during this phase >> (5) that a detailed specification list and a proposed roadmap be >> developed and costed over the ensuing 6 months with the assistance of >> suitably qualified professional software project leader (paid). >> >> At this point we have a grand plan and hopefully the interest of some >> of the target audience. Decisions to be made now include >> >> Does the project proceed? >> What licence model? >> Target platform(s)? >> Does the project develop an entire application or just the core >> components with a suitable licence to encourage others to add pieces >> to it? >> Core components, programming language and technologies. >> Develop in Australia or India? >> How to make the project sustainable? >> >> Our GP does not anticipate that any actual coding will be done by >> donors, the only acceptable donations will be dollars or time in >> developing the social network around the project. As deliverables >> appear there will be the opportunity for secondary use by those >> wishing to develop, fork or otherwise use the available code. >> >> All input welcome. >> >> Tony Eviston >> _______________________________________________ >> Gpcg_talk mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk >> > _______________________________________________ > Gpcg_talk mailing list > [email protected] > http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk > > _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
