Heath Frankel schreef: > Bert, > Well why don't you start a blog on the openEHR WIKI (confluence uses the > term News for a Blog article) about your experience as a starting point > rather than waiting for someone else to start it. It does not need to be > anything too in depth initially just to test the interest. Others might > then write their own blog articles and from these we can start a Wiki page > consolidating the agreed ideas. > This is a good idea, I didn't come to that, it is a way of starting a discussion, and tell about I am doing and the way I solve problems without giving my product away Email always give me the feeling of volatility, and a blog is just that bit more persistent to be worth spending time in it.
Again a good idea Thanks Bert > Another good blog topic might be the changes you made to the OS Java Kernel. > Using the Blog is better than an email thread as it will serve as a > permanent record of those ideas which get lost and fragmented in email. > > I think you will find that the majority of Open Source Software is written > by one person or a very few people (small company) and this is reflected in > the current openEHR reference implementations (Java Kernel, ADL Workbench, > both Archetype Editors). The interest in these tools were probably not > known until they were released as open source. As the interest grows in the > open source project, additional parties come on board and contribute, but > there always needs some ONE to plant the seed. > > Heath > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: openehr-technical-bounces at openehr.org [mailto:openehr-technical- >> bounces at openehr.org] On Behalf Of Bert Verhees >> Sent: Sunday, 6 January 2008 7:35 PM >> To: timothywayne.cook at gmail.com; For openEHR technical discussions >> Subject: Re: persistence >> >> Tim Cook schreef: >> >>> On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 16:59 +0100, Bert Verhees wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Thomas Beale schreef: >>>> >>>> >>>>> Probably you need to clarify the concrete basis of this discussion >>>>> > from > >>>>> your point of view. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> The fact is, I have a persistence layer running, can be optimized on >>>> some places (working on that), but is does it job. I don't need others >>>> to help me. >>>> >>>> >>> Hi Bert, >>> >>> Hmmmm, I find this a little confusing. In your many posts you are >>> calling for people to help develop a persistence API. Yet here you are >>> saying that you have one and do not need help. >>> >>> Maybe some clarification will help. Is there a place where you have >>> made your Java implementation open source and available to others for >>> assessment? >>> >>> >> (I do not, at this moment want to publish my code. I worked two years on >> my code, I keep it for myself until there will be a good reason to >> publish it) >> First, we can discuss an API, maybe my code this not fit at all in the >> results of this discussion. >> I am not important, nor is my code important, the *plan* is important, >> and that I explained a few times. >> >> Do we need the code from other participants before we can discuss a good >> way to implement the ideas behind it? >> I can explain how I did things, for assessment-purposes, if you like, >> better is, explain it for progress-purposes. That is, maybe important, >> that is part of the discussion. Others can have others ideas or like >> what I have done, or have on some parts the idea that it can be done on >> a better way, that is discussion. That is what I call for. >> But first we need people who want to discuss, A discussion on my own is >> a lonely thing. >> >> I want with others to build an API, with or without me (I am not >> important), so problems that will show up during doing this will reflect >> to the Java-kernel. ("the way is important" (Buddhist saying)). >> Also I hope this project then will facilitate others to build their >> products, so the market potential of Openehr is boosted because of more >> products coming to that market. >> If needed and wanted, I will be happy to share my experience, and >> work/code, but there must be some reason to do so. Maybe my code does >> not fit at all in what others are going to do, why should I publish it >> > then? > >> Open Source in my opinion means, working together, not one does the job, >> others look. >> This last statement is not personally pointing to someone special. >> Open Source, can be, in my opinion, develop a plan together, an >> architecture, and build it together, so others of that community have >> ways to analyze and judge the progress on criteria they made up together >> before. If others have other opinions on this, please say. >> >> I discussed about one/two month ago with Rong, on this very same >> mailinglist. >> He agreed an open source API would be a good idea, but the discussion >> stopped without coming to further plans. >> >> Every month or few months, we see emails appear from people the ask >> where to start, or how to do persistence. >> They always get an answer. From some of these people we never hear >> again, because, I can only guess, maybe, they give up. >> That is not good, we need implementers, we must facilitate them, make it >> easy to step in, making openehr become something that will be important >> worldwide. >> >> Now I stop writing about this, for the moment, I believe I explained >> every aspect a few times in a few days. >> >> Thanks for your attention >> Bert >> >> _______________________________________________ >> openEHR-technical mailing list >> openEHR-technical at openehr.org >> http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical >> > > _______________________________________________ > openEHR-technical mailing list > openEHR-technical at openehr.org > http://lists.chime.ucl.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/openehr-technical > > >
