--- Nandalal Gunaratne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Greg Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[NG]
One problem in people not learning from VistA is that it is so
difficult to install and run!
[GW]
The trouble is that VistA was developed over a period of approximately
30 years during which it was incrementally deployed to the same
intitutions. Though the process of deploying and installing VistA
applications was vastly simplified with the introuction of KIDS (Kernel
Integrated Distribution System), VistA simply is not installed "from
the ground up" very often. The VA medical centers where it is now
deployed have been running VistA for years, so they don't have to build
everything from scratch, just install new patches or modules. What is
going on on Hardhats (from my point of view, anyway) is that a group of
people are trying to figure out how to bootstrap a new practice or
institution on VistA, and it's proving to require some effort.
The other point is that the various modules have different licences. It
is not fully open sourced in that sense (or am I wrong?).
[GW]
There are VistA components that rely on proprietary technology to
function, but that is really neither here nor there. If you write a C
compiler for Windows, it can certainly be open source, even if it only
runs on a commercial OS. With regard to platforms: VistA runs under
InterSystems Cache' (a commercial M implementation) and GT.M (an open
source M implementation). Historically, it has run under DSM, OpenM,
MSM, and others). At present, Cache and GT.M seem to be the focus of
most attention, but it (VistA) is not in principle limited to these
platforms. In fact, one of the reasons VistA has historically stayed
within the ANSI MUMPS standard (except for system libraries) is to
maintain portability.
[NG]
Some of the largest modules are for insurance purposes and they may be
useless for some others. especially outside the USA.
[GW]
Yes, that's true. I thought you were talking about the basic platform,
not other systems with which it has interfaces.
[NG]
Let us develop good documentation and make VistA easier to setup, and
separate the open source free parts clearly from the others. I know
that there is an OpenVistA project but, the documentation is
insufficient on the above facts.
[GW]
That sounds like a good idea to me.
===
Gregory Woodhouse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed.
Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as
being self-evident."
--Arthur Schopenhauer
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
