Dear all,
I am happy to annouce that the transfer of the domain name oshca.org
from Brian had been completed. Brian is in the process of creating and
signing a document disclaiming rights to the OSHCA trademark. Thank you
Brian for these initiatives.
I understand that Brian will also make a de
It sounds like there is little consensus for having any special status for
open source software. Certainly not enough to warrant a group letter. Are
there any more thoughts on how much a certification should cost?
-FT
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Yahoo! Groups Links
Greg Woodhouse wrote:
> It seems to me that there are two threads of discussion here that are
> not at all merging. One issue is whether testing can and should be made
> cheaper.
I didn't think we were talking about testing; we were talking about
certification. Certification is about getting a tic
Tim.Churches wrote:
> Will Ross wrote:
> > Fred,
> >
> > I oppose the creation of a separate open source certification
> > process. I think it compromises the opportunity for open source
> > solutions to displace commercial solutions, and it distracts open
> > source projects from leveraging the
--- In openhealth@yahoogroups.com, "Ignacio Valdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
> "The goal of the http://www.mirthproject.org/ Mirth Project is to
> develop an open source cross-platform HL7 interface engine that
> enables bi-directional sending of HL7 messages between systems and
> applic
It seems to me that there are two threads of discussion here that are
not at all merging. One issue is whether testing can and should be made
cheaper. Maybe it can, but testing is the last line of defense in
software quality, and is highly problematic, relying essentially on
chance to hit upon the
Greg Woodhouse wrote:
> Every software developer writes unit tests,
In your dreams!
> but the unit test typically
> end up being files on their hard drives at some point. Making unit
> tests into artifacts is a relatively recent phenomenon,
Agreed, but I had recent releases of open source softw
Every software developer writes unit tests, but the unit test typically
end up being files on their hard drives at some point. Making unit
tests into artifacts is a relatively recent phenomenon, and even more
so is the idea of writing test cases before you code (one of the tents
of XP). If unit tes
Will Ross wrote:
> Fred,
>
> I oppose the creation of a separate open source certification
> process. I think it compromises the opportunity for open source
> solutions to displace commercial solutions, and it distracts open
> source projects from leveraging the collaborative process to creat
Wayne Wilson wrote:
> Finally if software is developed with unit test capabilities, it is
> quite easy to repeat unit tests upon software modification, so this does
> not become much of a burden either.
Indeed. My approach these days when considering open source software
components for serious use
Wayne Wilson wrote:
> > From: "Tim.Churches" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> >Any other ideas for S3?
> >
> 1) Wait for Google to offer it for free :)
>
> Seriously, Google already offers 2GB of free web 'mail' space. Someone
> has already figured out how to make a file system like interface
--- Will Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-
Fred,
I oppose the creation of a separate open source certification
process. I think it compromises the opportunity for open source
solutions to displace commercial solutions, and it distracts open
source projects
Certification is certainly a can of worms. In the past a strong case
has been made for certification to ensure public safety. Electrical
components in the US are certified by Underwriter's Laboratory (UL),
electrical installations are certified by passing a local inspection
process, and more t
On Monday 27 March 2006 09:46 am, Will Ross wrote:
> Rod,
>
> In general, I think it is unhelpful to imagine that Free Software has
> a nature entirely separate from commercial activity. Eric Raymond's
> meta-analysis is a useful historical document, but is not relevant to
> this discussio
Fred,
I oppose the creation of a separate open source certification
process. I think it compromises the opportunity for open source
solutions to displace commercial solutions, and it distracts open
source projects from leveraging the collaborative process to create
seriously superior sol
> From: "Tim.Churches" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
>Any other ideas for S3?
>
1) Wait for Google to offer it for free :)
Seriously, Google already offers 2GB of free web 'mail' space. Someone
has already figured out how to make a file system like interface to that.
This is the tip of an iceberg
This is an interesting discussion. However we do have some decisions to
make.
1. Does the different nature free and open source medical software warrant
different consideration than proprietary models for CCHIT certification
pricing. (If a large number of people feel this way then we should draft
Aren't we missing the larger issue? Proper certification of health
information systems is going to be expensive, and that is probably
unavoidable. Moeover, someone is going to have to bear the burden of
that cost. I'm not sure that this question should really be tied to the
certification model, tho
Rod,
In general, I think it is unhelpful to imagine that Free Software has
a nature entirely separate from commercial activity. Eric Raymond's
meta-analysis is a useful historical document, but is not relevant to
this discussion. We are discussing the relationship between open
source b
On Saturday 25 March 2006 03:08 am, Thomas Beale wrote:
> Rod Roark wrote:
> > The point is, open source (as in Free Software) is NOT a business
> > model. It's a method and end result of collaboration among users.
> > I make good money at it only because some of those users are willing
> > to pay
20 matches
Mail list logo
