Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 21:27:18 +0200, Robert Meggle robert.meg...@care2x.org wrote: Please see attached the roadmap for care2x 3.0. Some of you recognized that there is something going on here - mostly on the branch called gettext. This is/was the codename for this new release what we will fix now soon as first release candidate with several changes. Please read it carefully and feel free to contact me, Gjergj or Mauri if you have questions. It is strange that after so many years in the Care2x project there are still people that do not have a clue of what a software package to support a Healthcare Information System is. About this paper, it could be a single page going like this: 1. The single most pragmatic and useful initiative in the Care2x project continues to be care2x_tz (I am sure that that's what has been keeping Care2x alive) 2. The wild goose chase of the last couple of years has been: PHP6, a phone interface, GUI reshaping. Like all the other previous wild goose chases in the Care2x project, this one did not and will not bring any new interest and people to the Care2x project. 3. There is a strong urge to command and control the project which, as everybody knows, is very difficult in any software project and totally impossible in an Open Source Software project. The page 9 of this paper is totally surrealistic corollary of this new round. 4. What Care2x really needs is a radical reduction in complexity, including: a) stop trying to be all things to all people b) use a single platform for development and develop code to a single platform: there were times when it was very difficult to understand if a given bug was related to the code, to the needed supporting software or to the emulator platform used to try to run all this in a different OS c) use a single widely available platform (price free and open source): with single, specific, OS flavor, DBMS, Web server, Web interface. Everybody must be using the same platform and living the same day-to-day problems, to be able to quickly see what is related to the Care2x code and what is due to idiosyncrasies of the platform; d) reduce the number of tables needed to make Care2x run to half of what they are now; e) modularize code. If the code logic blocs are really modularized (into closed black boxes), anybody will be able to quickly code and put into place an alternative bloc without breaking the rest of the system; f) do not attempt to command and control putative developers. Do not attempt to force project's roadmap, just to be able to convert it into a quick cash cow. In the case of the Care2x project people just keep arriving and leaving without seeing that illusive cow; Somewhere in the paper it is written: Build a standardized process and business outcomes Beware of the fact that standardization and innovation are opposite variables. Since Elpidio's first code releases we have had more and more standardization and less and less innovation and creativity... and it has not been the best thing regarding the project health and wealth. Regards, JA -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 ___ Care2002-developers mailing list Care2002-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/care2002-developers
Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
Hi On 25 September 2011 09:43, an...@e-healthexpert.org wrote: 1. The single most pragmatic and useful initiative in the Care2x project continues to be care2x_tz (I am sure that that's what has been keeping Care2x alive) I am not sure whether you intend this as a compliment or a criticism, but as someone who has worked in a number of hospitals trying to implement care2x_tz I have a few comments. Firstly I agree that it has probably been the branch that has been most used, at least on the info that seems publicly available. However it does have many limitations, and a number of the hospitals who have tried to use it have failed. One of the reasons for this is that actually the care2x_tz project has fractured into many different branches. To my mind this is to do with a lack of what you call 'command and control'. Robert has done an amazing job in trying to bring these disparate branches together, but I honestly believe that the best thing to do with care2x_tz is to scrap it, and restart the project from this latest code base. 2. The wild goose chase of the last couple of years has been: PHP6, a phone interface, GUI reshaping. Like all the other previous wild goose chases in the Care2x project, this one did not and will not bring any new interest and people to the Care2x project. Well I don't think the care2x developers can be blamed for the demise of the PHP6 project. I too have my doubts about the usefulness of the phone interface, but I'm not sure I would call it a wild goose chase, just an interesting initiative that may or may not come up with something useful. As for the gui, if you have ever used the current one you will surely agree it could be improved :-) 3. There is a strong urge to command and control the project which, as everybody knows, is very difficult in any software project and totally impossible in an Open Source Software project. The page 9 of this paper is totally surrealistic corollary of this new round. Well after many years in open source, I believe that those projects which have a strong central command are best placed to survive. Look at most of the successful projects they have this strong centre. 4. What Care2x really needs is a radical reduction in complexity, including: a) stop trying to be all things to all people b) use a single platform for development and develop code to a single platform: there were times when it was very difficult to understand if a given bug was related to the code, to the needed supporting software or to the emulator platform used to try to run all this in a different OS Either I don't understand you or this paragraph is nonsense. What emulator platform are we talking about? c) use a single widely available platform (price free and open source): with single, specific, OS flavor, DBMS, Web server, Web interface. Everybody must be using the same platform and living the same day-to-day problems, to be able to quickly see what is related to the Care2x code and what is due to idiosyncrasies of the platform; As above. d) reduce the number of tables needed to make Care2x run to half of what they are now; I agree, but have you checked out the latest code? e) modularize code. If the code logic blocs are really modularized (into closed black boxes), anybody will be able to quickly code and put into place an alternative bloc without breaking the rest of the system; This is exactly what Robert and Gjergj have been doing with this 3.0 code. Did you not look at it first before sending this email? f) do not attempt to command and control putative developers. Do not attempt to force project's roadmap, just to be able to convert it into a quick cash cow. In the case of the Care2x project people just keep arriving and leaving without seeing that illusive cow; I don't think (though Robert may correct me) that there is any intention to prevent developers from working on the core, its just that as with most projects, having commit access to the core will be restricted to those who have proved their ability first. Somewhere in the paper it is written: Build a standardized process and business outcomes Beware of the fact that standardization and innovation are opposite variables. Hmmm, I am not sure that this is correct, what is your basis for this? Since Elpidio's first code releases we have had more and more standardization and less and less innovation and creativity... and it has not been the best thing regarding the project health and wealth. Regards, JA Thanks Tim -- WebERP Africa Ltd +447710427049 +256752963327 +255758554413 www.weberpafrica.com -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And
Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
Hi Antas, Thank you very much for your first contribution here since long time by having that lovely rude concepts like we know you. And I think as long as you contributing in that way we seem to be on the right track. About your points: You seemed not follow the development over the last years nor you seems to have any concept so far. But let me bring it to the point: * There is no intention to prevent developers - quite the opposite is given * Care2x_tz had not been stopped - the concept of 3.0 will help them out of some issues. * You might not know the details neither following the development over the years - but the modularisation is what I wrote, isn't it? The other points of your mail seem confused and contain simple acts of senseless provocations like we used to have it from you. But I have too much work here than wasting time on argue on it as long I cannot feel that there would be a productive outcome. But maybe you could give essential basis on your statements, then you might get attention from my side again. Thanks Robert Am Sonntag, den 25.09.2011, 09:43 +0100 schrieb an...@e-healthexpert.org: e-healthexpert.org -- MEROTECH IT Engineering Robert Meggle St.-Mang-Str. 8 87616 Marktoberdorf Germany Tel: +49(0)8342 - 8956729 Fax: +49(0)8342 - 8956730 mailto:meg...@merotech.de -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 ___ Care2002-developers mailing list Care2002-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/care2002-developers
Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:55:11 +0100, Tim Schofield t...@weberpafrica.com wrote: Hi On 25 September 2011 09:43, an...@e-healthexpert.org wrote: 1. The single most pragmatic and useful initiative in the Care2x project continues to be care2x_tz (I am sure that that's what has been keeping Care2x alive) I am not sure whether you intend this as a compliment or a criticism, Compliment. fractured into many different branches. To my mind this is to do with a lack of what you call 'command and control'. I was referring to 'command and control' not governance and leadership. Any software development project needs governance and leadership. Healthcare supporting software do need, perhaps, even more than other software projects The problem is that healthcare systems are a special kind of systems - complex adaptive systems - and those cannot be governed by means of command and control. In those systems the way to go naturally emerges from the day-to-day activities. Sometimes, under a few very special conditions, you even influence those systems. But you will not be able to dictate the way to go by decree (either of a single individual or of an illuminated oligarchy). amazing job in trying to bring these disparate branches together, but I honestly believe that the best thing to do with care2x_tz is to scrap it, and restart the project from this latest code base. The real innovators have been Gjergj and Mauri, not Meggle. Most of the relevant work that is being raved now I can trace it back to Gjergj or to Mauri. I find it more difficult to trace back any good code or pragmatical ideas to Meggle. I have been following, however, that tendency that Meggle has to be the owner of the shop (looking back, I wonder, is this one of those german things). Well I don't think the care2x developers can be blamed for the demise of the PHP6 project. I too have my doubts about the usefulness of the phone interface, but I'm not sure I would call it a wild goose chase, just an interesting initiative that may or may not come up with something useful. That's where governance should step in. To call these attempts what they are: a waste of already scarce developer resources. As for the gui, if you have ever used the current one you will surely agree it could be improved :-) Well, I have used a lot (for a few years now, I tendo to prefer OpenEMR) and I agree that the GUI needs improvement. But that improvement is not critical. What is critical, in this fase of the project (and, at least in the last 6 years), is the simplification and modularization of the code. Well after many years in open source, I believe that those projects which have a strong central command are best placed to survive. Look at most of the successful projects they have this strong centre. A strong leadership and a lean governance mechanism. Linux, Ubuntu, Nginx, Postfix are good examples of that. MySQL, PHP and Apache are lousy examples. Just to cite a few. Either I don't understand you or this paragraph is nonsense. What emulator platform are we talking about? Those which try to emulate a LAMP in a non L(inux) machine? c) use a single widely available platform (price free and open source): with single, specific, OS flavor, DBMS, Web server, Web interface. Everybody must be using the same platform and living the same day-to-day problems, to be able to quickly see what is related to the Care2x code and what is due to idiosyncrasies of the platform; As above. To be able to develop and debug Care2x and not be distracted by problems not related with the Care2x code, we should reduce variability: by using a given distro flavor, periodicaly updated following a given cicle (problems dealing with the code changes in DBMS, PHP and other supporting software are naturally taken care by that distro maintainers update mechanism). This single change was critical to boost the success of OpenEMR. Not so long ago (2 years?) it was quite like Care2x, now it is one of the sole Full 'Meaningful Use' Certified Open Source software (http://openhealthnews.com/hotnews/openemr-41-achieves-full-meaningful-use-certification). And, by the way, I continue to think that the best thing that could happen to Care2x would be a merge with the OpenEMR project. They need those hospital management extensions, and Care2x sure would profit from that project leadership and development flexibility and discipline. d) reduce the number of tables needed to make Care2x run to half of what they are now; I agree, but have you checked out the latest code? Well, yes. And I am sure that if you check with Gjergj he will be able to tell you who first suggested the need for that (and a few other) changes a few years ago. This is exactly what Robert and Gjergj have been doing with this 3.0 code. Did you not look at it first before sending this email? Ditto. I don't think (though Robert may correct me) that there is any intention to
Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
Hi On 25 September 2011 14:18, J. Antas an...@e-healthexpert.org wrote: I was referring to 'command and control' not governance and leadership. Any software development project needs governance and leadership. Healthcare supporting software do need, perhaps, even more than other software projects The problem is that healthcare systems are a special kind of systems - complex adaptive systems - and those cannot be governed by means of command and control. In those systems the way to go naturally emerges from the day-to-day activities. Sometimes, under a few very special conditions, you even influence those systems. But you will not be able to dictate the way to go by decree (either of a single individual or of an illuminated oligarchy). It has been a source of amusement for me over many years that people involved in a particular kind of system, always think that theirs is special kind of system and that facts common to all other systems do not apply on theirs. The truth is normally very different... amazing job in trying to bring these disparate branches together, but I honestly believe that the best thing to do with care2x_tz is to scrap it, and restart the project from this latest code base. The real innovators have been Gjergj and Mauri, not Meggle. Most of the relevant work that is being raved now I can trace it back to Gjergj or to Mauri. I find it more difficult to trace back any good code or pragmatical ideas to Meggle. I have been following, however, that tendency that Meggle has to be the owner of the shop (looking back, I wonder, is this one of those german things). Well I know all 3 individuals on a personal and a professional level, and I am surprised, and I think they will be surprised by this rather silly and racist statement. Well I don't think the care2x developers can be blamed for the demise of the PHP6 project. I too have my doubts about the usefulness of the phone interface, but I'm not sure I would call it a wild goose chase, just an interesting initiative that may or may not come up with something useful. That's where governance should step in. To call these attempts what they are: a waste of already scarce developer resources. Without any command and control surely people can work on whatever aspects of the system they want to, not just the ones that you dictate will be a waste of time. The best ideas will get incorporated, the bad ones will die. That's how open source works. BTW I think you will find that the phone interface idea came from Mauri not Robert. As for the gui, if you have ever used the current one you will surely agree it could be improved :-) Well, I have used a lot (for a few years now, I tendo to prefer OpenEMR) and I agree that the GUI needs improvement. But that improvement is not critical. What is critical, in this fase of the project (and, at least in the last 6 years), is the simplification and modularization of the code. Well after many years in open source, I believe that those projects which have a strong central command are best placed to survive. Look at most of the successful projects they have this strong centre. A strong leadership and a lean governance mechanism. Linux, Ubuntu, Nginx, Postfix are good examples of that. MySQL, PHP and Apache are lousy examples. Just to cite a few. Exactly my point I'm pleased to see you have changed your mind are now in favour of strong leadership. Either I don't understand you or this paragraph is nonsense. What emulator platform are we talking about? Those which try to emulate a LAMP in a non L(inux) machine? Well just as equally LAMP is an emulator of a WAMP machine then isn't it. Can you maybe illustrate your point by telling us where the code works in Linux and not in Windows? c) use a single widely available platform (price free and open source): with single, specific, OS flavor, DBMS, Web server, Web interface. Everybody must be using the same platform and living the same day-to-day problems, to be able to quickly see what is related to the Care2x code and what is due to idiosyncrasies of the platform; As above. To be able to develop and debug Care2x and not be distracted by problems not related with the Care2x code, we should reduce variability: by using a given distro flavor, periodicaly updated following a given cicle (problems dealing with the code changes in DBMS, PHP and other supporting software are naturally taken care by that distro maintainers update mechanism). You are missing a crucial point I think. Given that apache, PHP and mysql are all available under a windows environment, how do you propose the developers should prevent people from using Care2x in windows or even on a Mac? It seems to me that having ranted about command and control earlier you are not only trying to dictate exactly what the developers can and cannot work on, but even the computer on which the user can use the software. This
Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
Hi carers Well done!!! Ready for module building, almost done IOS app, Android is on the way. Let me know, i am ever ready for this prj. Claudio -- Caselle da 1GB, trasmetti allegati fino a 3GB e in piu' IMAP, POP3 e SMTP autenticato? GRATIS solo con Email.it http://www.email.it/f Sponsor: Scopri i vantaggi del riconoscimento vocale e come convertire file Pdf su nuanceforbusiness.com Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=11843d=25-9 -- All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable. Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy2 ___ Care2002-developers mailing list Care2002-developers@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/care2002-developers
Re: [Care2002-developers] roadmap to care2x 3.0 up to its first release candidate (beta)
Hi, Hot discussion means there is some life still in Care2x. I think the simple reason there is more life in Tz version is that we do not have resources to use commercial software and open source is more realistic even with the weaknesses it has. It deserves deep discussion why Care2x and other open source options have not got bigger market share in countries where they have more money available. I believe the reason is that health care industry wants very reliable support and it is better organized in privat companies. The quality issues of opens source HMIS could have been sorted out. Robert deserves credit for Tz version because he has done most of it up to 2008 and my role was to look what might be needed and would be realistic in the hospitals. The main branch was more about medical records and our version is more following the flow of people, services and money in the hospital. The health care in most poor countries is a kind of black hole, nobody knows very much what is done and how the money and resources are spent. We are not using many of the EMR features that we got from the main branc version. Here comes also the need for mobile version. It is intended for small dispensaries and health centers in the rural area, where people do not have computers but are quite familiar with cellphones. When you do not have reliable power other than solar and no service for computers the robust mobile phones give better option. I would not consider mobile version for our bigger hospitals. But mobile option might have smaller role in the future even in developed countries. They found in some US hospital (cannot find the link now) that some features of hospital software are faster and easier done with mobile phones if they are kept in the pocket - and that brings some savings. At the moment the mobile version we are working with means simple front end and the software is running in computers and in small clinics it would mean running on small notebook computer with small screen and long battery life. To build a version running 100% in mobile phone will mean building a new software (Android has been discussed so far) The problem with Tz branch and using it has been that people take the code and customize to their needs but do not bring anything back to the community. The only exception is HMIS-CHAK, which you can find in sf.net. It was customized by a small Kenyan team from our version of Care2x. They are also serving more public church hospitals, what have been our main clients. But it seems that most developers use open source software to get some income if they can use it as it is or customize a little bit for their clients, but are not really intersted in contributing to the community. Our team has also had to learn their lesson when they allowed every hospital to get their own version and the maintainance became too demanding. What is now elct branch is synthesis of them, but is is a mixture of many developers and not easy to work with. The plan with the new Care2x 3.0 is to simplify customization to different local needs when the modules are indepenent from each other. The technical side is designed together by Robert and Gjergj and we hope that elct full version will be migrated module by module to be optional modules for 3.0 version. Mobile version would be simpler option. The simpler we can make the software the easier it is to use and maintain. Mauri 2011/9/25 Tim Schofield t...@weberpafrica.com Hi On 25 September 2011 14:18, J. Antas an...@e-healthexpert.org wrote: I was referring to 'command and control' not governance and leadership. Any software development project needs governance and leadership. Healthcare supporting software do need, perhaps, even more than other software projects The problem is that healthcare systems are a special kind of systems - complex adaptive systems - and those cannot be governed by means of command and control. In those systems the way to go naturally emerges from the day-to-day activities. Sometimes, under a few very special conditions, you even influence those systems. But you will not be able to dictate the way to go by decree (either of a single individual or of an illuminated oligarchy). It has been a source of amusement for me over many years that people involved in a particular kind of system, always think that theirs is special kind of system and that facts common to all other systems do not apply on theirs. The truth is normally very different... amazing job in trying to bring these disparate branches together, but I honestly believe that the best thing to do with care2x_tz is to scrap it, and restart the project from this latest code base. The real innovators have been Gjergj and Mauri, not Meggle. Most of the relevant work that is being raved now I can trace it back to Gjergj or to Mauri. I find it more difficult to trace back any good code or pragmatical ideas to Meggle. I have been
