[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please.
From: |
Richard Terry |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please. |
Date: |
Fri, 7 Jan 2005 13:18:09 +1100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.4 |
> So, at this stage of development, I would schedule the model (GnuMed
> backend) as the main objective. All of us know the objective is being
> accomplished with ... an excellent mark.
None of that is in dispute and I've always acknowledged that. However
designing a backend without taking into account the overall picture into
account is fraught with later problems, a fact even acknowledged in some of
Karsten's emails.
I'm not sure why the debate on 'Management' has to be a justification of the
current status quo, or a defence of the way the project currently is.
> I can't figure out why you say that. I've heard people in
> university, that are currently involved in health information systems
> development, saying, after looked at GnuMed project and backend model:
> 'aren't we reinventing the wheel? Shouldn't we use GnuMed?'. They are
> currently not involved in GnuMed, but really appreciate it, and I
> guarantee they're not *'blind spot'* or easy to convince...
I'm not sure if you read Tim's observations, but they don't exactly concur
with this view. Again, you seem to be talking about the backend, I'm talking
about the whole project.
>
> >I've watched a large number of talented people come enthusiastically to
> > the project, only to melt away into cyberspace.
>
> And many were (legitimally) looking for a ready-to-use software.
That's not true Carlos, having been involved with the project a lot longer
than yourself. We have had many extremely competent people who had the
programming skills to be involved, were involved in area's crucial to gnumed
(such as pathology downloding) who expressed interest, but who melted away.
One has to ask why, and not just try and defend the status quo.
As you correctly say yourself, gnuMed is a very ambitious project. What we
need now is more manpower. Horst doesn't really have the time and probably
won't for the forseable future. That really leaves, Karsten, yourself and
Ian as the mainstream developers with Syan who seems to do slightly different
work on the edges (Syan - don't get upset about this comment if I'm wrong).
> Sorry if i repeat myself. For me, we *do have project management*,
> and Karsten is doing an excellent work on driving and helping this boat
> to arrive to a good harbour. If anyone, *coder or not, that's not the
> question*, takes the effort of collaborating in managing in the
> follow-up of this project, that's perfect ... people's hours in any
> tasks (coding, designing - I really appreciate your designs and ideas,
> Richard, managing) is what we need...
And I'd repeat myself again and Karsten is the first to acknowledge this, he
is not a 'manager' he is a skilled back-end programmer. Management is not
about backend design/coding/implementation. At the risk of sounding
fractious, note the definition of management:
==========================================
Manage \Man"age\, v. i.
To direct affairs; to carry on business or affairs; to
administer.
Leave them to manage for thee. --Dryden.
Manage \Man"age\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Managed; p. pr. & vb. n.
Managing.] [From Manage, n.]
1. To have under control and direction; to conduct; to guide;
to administer; to treat; to handle.
===========================================
IE management is about overview, guidence and direction. Hence a project
manager or a project management team.
One of the problems in this project is as I've previously stated many of the
member of the development team are focussed in their area without respecting
the abilities or perceptions of others. I don't pretend to be a 'coder', I
respect and admire yourself/Karsten/Ian's/Syans ability in this area. I am
however very good at overview and functionality, which I don't feel is
respected or listened too enough. I find it fascinating that having
investigated wx2.5+ some 6 months ago and moved to that myself, having
seen/read about its advantages, that despite advocating that on the list it
has been totally ignored. However a single line from Horst leads to a sudden
change of heart from others.
Anyway, I'll desist now as I fear I'm wearing out my welcome
Regards
Richard
>
>
> Best regards,
> carlos
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gnumed-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnumed-devel
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., E Dodd, 2005/01/06
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Carlos Moro, 2005/01/06
- Re: [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., Carlos Moro, 2005/01/07
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., catmat, 2005/01/07
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Carlos Moro, 2005/01/08
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., catmat, 2005/01/08
- Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Carlos Moro, 2005/01/10
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Karsten Hilbert, 2005/01/09
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Karsten Hilbert, 2005/01/09
Re: [Gnumed-devel] Time for a major re-think in 2005 - opinions please., Thilo Schuler, 2005/01/09