John S. Gage wrote:
>I have thought about this problem a lot.
>Originally, I had visions of physician programmers turning out
>Open Source code. Those were visions. I believe the correct
>approach is to make medical open source as congruent with the
>Linux/Apache/PHP/etc. open source world as possible in order to
>attract as large a group of programmers as possible.
>Admittedly, in contrast to something like Linux, the users of
>the software will not be the programmers, but then again neither
>will they be in the GEHR schema
However, the "users" may be organizations, such as hospitals,
and may therefore include programmers.
>The enthusiasm that motivates the open source programmer is not
>entirely pecuniary. It's that enthusiasm that we should tap.
>John Gage
>
>Thomas Beale wrote:
>>Agree. But consider this: the more specialised a
>>product/project, the fewer people who will work on it. I think
>>it is reasonable to say that far fewer people than work on Linux
>>will work on (e.g.) the GEHR kernel. And for most people on this
>>group, there will be no need to compile the GEHR kernel - if
>>they are building applications, they As I say, not "everyone",
>>just the interested parties. It will be a much smaller number.
---------------------------------------
Jim Self
Manager and Chief Developer
VMTH Computer Services, UC Davis
(http://www.vmth.ucdavis.edu/us/jaself)
