[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please.
From: |
Richard Terry |
Subject: |
[Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please. |
Date: |
Wed, 5 Jan 2005 12:26:50 +1100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
One of my new-year resolutions was to try and re-start the debate again on
gnuMed and the way it is heading (or not heading depending on which way one
looks at it).
I'd ask anyone reading this to give it time and considered, not knee jerk
opinion. Though I've mentioned particular names of some of those involved in
the project, I hope that those mentioned are able to not take any comments
I've made in a personal way. Also, firing back comments to this post such as
'its in the Wiki' 'It's in the road-map' is not going to be helpful.
Perhaps asking those who susbscribe to the list but don't take an active part
in development to pass an honest opinion on the processes of this group and
what they see the problems as and how things could be improved.
Slashdotters amongst you may possibly already have read one of today's links
entitled "Developers, is your project a sinking ship?". If not please read
the link before continuing:
http://www.acmqueue.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=239
and specifically try and apply the criteria to gnuMed, if necessary by this
quick link:
http://www.acmqueue.com/figures/issue019/tiwana2.gif
Anyone checking out the gnuMed web site is confronted by the following hopeful
description;
==============================================
As its major project, it is busy building a medical software package that will
be
* open source
* free
* secure
* respectful of patient privacy
* based on open standards
* flexible
* fully featured
* networked (client-server architecture)
* easy to use
* multi platform
* multi lingual
Gnumed is being actively developed, but is not yet ready for
clinical use.
==============================================
The essence of the problem to me is whether or not gnuMed can ever offer an
alternative to current medical software, if it continues in its current
unmanaged direction. Having such an ambitious project which in the end only
works for a few individuals in the world because that's the way they designed
it, is not of much use.
Some sort of project management I beleive is essential for gnuMed. If one
looks at all the sucessful open-source software projects, ranging from KDE to
GIMP, Abiword etc, all have some sort of project management teams. There is
an overall goal, and each of the developers have an allocated role, with
someone having a final say in certain area's.
gnuMed seems to have no such structure. We addressed this in detail during our
gnuMed conference in Sydney a long time ago. We attempted to put in motion a
process which would involve a proper plan for the project, to no avail. The
frustration for me is that a number of active developers on the list seem to
actually beleive that there is structure and process, almost like they have a
'blind spot'.
I've watched a large number of talented people come enthusiastically to the
project, only to melt away into cyberspace. I Myself, have gone through long
periods of not even bothering to read the listmail, 'disappearing' for months
on end.
IN Summary I beleive:
1) We need a project manager WHO IS NOT INVOLVED WITH CODING.
ie someone with project management experience and talents who at the end of
the day has the final say, who can overide Karsten, Horst, Ian, myself,
carlos, etc, because they will have the ability to have a larger over-view
than anyone in the project.
2) Individuals who are accepted as part of the project development team need
to have their abilities respected, and given the final say in their aspect of
the project design over other team members, subject to the final decision of
the project manager.
3) We need a heavy dose of reality checking in respect to what will make the
project actually become usuable e.g sticking to the niave belief that drugref
will be able to provide usable drug data to the office desk of working GP's
in australia needs to be replaced with the pragmatic decision to make a deal
with say MIMS and use their drug data. As much as you try an argue against
this stuff it is reality. Perhaps in the future we can switch to DrugRef, but
not now.
Though I almost cringe at the thought of another frustratiing day, perhaps its
time for another gnuMed AU(+DE) conference to thrash this out for once and
for all.
Thoughts??
Regards
Richard
- [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please.,
Richard Terry <=
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., catmat, 2005/01/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Horst Herb, 2005/01/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Tim Churches, 2005/01/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Karsten Hilbert, 2005/01/05
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Ian Haywood, 2005/01/06
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Karsten Hilbert, 2005/01/06
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Horst Herb, 2005/01/06
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Hilmar Berger, 2005/01/06
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Karsten Hilbert, 2005/01/06
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Hilmar Berger, 2005/01/07