Re: [Gnumed-devel] Feature Freeze announcement

[Karsten Hilbert]

On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 11:36:35PM +0200, Hilmar Berger wrote:

> I tried to figure out what has to be done before 0.1 by
> looking at the TODO file, but couldn't find out which tasks are
> before and which post 0.1 - we will have to update this file
> once we will have decided on the functionality we want to
> provide.
The TODO *file* in CVS is basically *all* post-0.1. The Wiki
has the TODO for pre-0.1.

> I looked at the modules that will go in 0.1 - and I am still
> not quite sure what we will show
Well, that is a list of functionality. It doesn't spell out
how it's being done. The status quo of "Release 0.1" is how
it's going to be done if you ask me.

> and if these modules (Manual,
> EMR-tree, EMR-journal, Setup, Patient Details and Progress
> Notes) are in a presentable state.
You can find that out by running the Release condidate.

> Manual: 
> This is quite outdated. Should we update it before the
> release of 0.1 or rather link to the wiki ? Or even provide a
> local copy of the wiki in the release package ?
Yes either way.

> EMR-tree / EMR- journal: These plugins show the same
> information, just the structure is different. Wouldn't it make
> sense to combine both in one plugin ?
Not now anymore IMO.

> Patient Details: This seems to do nothing but display patient
> data (i.e. Add/Del-Buttons do nothing). On the other hand you
> can register new patients from the menu bar. Why this
> separation ?
because it's a different kind of task

> Why not connect the code that adds a new patient
> to the Patient Details page ??
the patient details page that used to be there isn't loaded in
the Release configuration anymore, we load Carlos' notebook
version now

> Progress Notes: Since the entry field below the notebook
> label seems to be for entering the Episode Name, I suggest to
> put a label there that says "Episode name:".
Correct, that's a TODO.

> My impression is that we need to review the feature list
> first. I'am *not* suggesting to add new functionality or more
> modules. I just had the feeling that the way the functionality
> is implemented right now might not attract many persons. Even
> if 0.1 is just a first release, it should show the *concepts*
> of the software. What Gnumed shows right now is less than
> showing even a consistent concept (duplicated functionality
> etc.).
We've had at least two years for doing so. No one has done it.
There is not any duplicated functionality that I can see. What
we've got now i a working candidate of acceptable consistency.
I should like to know about grave problems right away. But 0.1
needs to be out very soon.

> IMHO the users should get an idea of what Gnumed might be
> like - and this impression should be positive.
We've had enough time to let users know what it might be like.
Our task of today is to give them GNUmed in a way that it IS
like. Which doesn't mean it has to *stay* that way at all.

> So, here are my suggestions: 
> - fix the specs for 0.1 so that it shows how a potential user
>   might work with gnumed. This includes a consistent concept and
>   workflow
Feel free to make specific suggestions.

Notice how the manual in the Wiki does list how a potential
user might work with GNUmed.

It is also quite apparent you have not worked in a medical
practice in the community. I have. And I have using GNUmed
(at it's current potential) - with real life data and not
fooling around.

> - fix and subsequently freeze the data model (backend)
Feel free to suggest things that need fixing. What
deficiencies do you see that are relevant ot 0.1 ?

> - fix middleware/user interface
Feel free to suggest or preferably act on specific things that
need fixing. What makes you think they need fixing ?

> - write a basic user guide describing the concept and typical workflow within 
> gnumed
feel free to go ahead

Karsten
-- 
GPG key ID E4071346 @ wwwkeys.pgp.net
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD  4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346