Re: [Hardhats-members] Broadcast of the WorldVistA meeting
Nancy, At the 'plenary.ogg link, I can't discern any human sound, but the Jplayer does *Start*, there is network activity, and I do here a faint mechanistic/audio white noise, at highest volume setting. I know Jplayer is working at least for the fsf.ogg file which is linked on the JOrbis page http://www.jcraft.com/jorbis/ The link midway in that page, offers an excellent talk by FreeSoftwareFoundation which works fine coming from their streaming server JRoar. Don't know why the rmu.edu file isnt delivering any coherent sound Thanks for trying to broadcast it. Rusty Nancy Anthracite wrote: I would guess it will not be blazingly fast, but I will see what I can find out. Randy might be interested in finding out why it isn't working for you (he is not here right now) so would you please send me information about how to contact you off the list if you are willing? On Friday 30 June 2006 13:50, Vivian Kost wrote: I haven't been able to get on the broadcast. Will you let us know if/when DVDs are available? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Anthracite Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 9:12 PM To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net; Randy Johnson; Valerie Harvey Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Broadcast of the WorldVistA meeting Actually, we can thank Randy Johnson and his coworkers who have provided us with absolutely top notch technical support. I mentioned TeamSpeak and was told they already had broadcast an open source broadcast option. You can't imagine what a pleasure this has been! There are also other options for the smaller break-out sessions that may come about as we proceed. The developers room has a conference phone that can handle VOIP so if anyone ever gets time to settle in there to do some work, there may be an option for some remote collaboration. If things don't happen, it will be my fault as the team is ready and willing to support as much as possible. Video is not possible at the moment, so don't ask, but there are a bunch of digital shutter bugs running around threatening to sell mug shots of the lot of us for a donation to WorldVistA. I am wondering if we can donate enough to prevent publication. ;-) Things have been pretty well hopping though, so I am not sure anyone will alight long enough for that to happen. The Slides are being diligently collected by Dee Knapp. I must say, you are not going to believe what the Mexicans have accomplished virtually on their own in and incredibly short time with a crew of only about 25-30 people. It will astound you I am sure. It absolutely blew me away. The recordings are going to be big downloads. Hopefully we can eventually make DVDs for those who want them. I would tell you more, and believe me there is much to tell and an awful lot of people to thank for a heck of a lot of work that went into getting this meeting put together and keeping it rolling, but I have work to do to get ready for tomorrow. On Thursday 29 June 2006 20:25, Ismet Kursunoglu wrote: Nancy, thank you very, very much for getting this done. I stand up, face the general direction of Pittsburgh and applaud! Sounds like you are capturing some really important content. On Thu, Jun 29, 2006 at 02:32:45PM -0400, Nancy Anthracite wrote: I TRIED to cut an paste it because I knew there was a typo. Sorry I didn't succeed! I should have checked. The folks from Mexico just told about their implementation that is in progress that will ultimately serve 45,000,000 patients. There is now a presentation about the Midland Hospital deployment ongoing. On Thursday 29 June 2006 13:42, Gokul Ram wrote: Nancy, I think there was a typo in the link. The below link should work. http://www.jcraft.com/jorbis/player/JOrbisPlayer.php?play=http://proxy1.rmu .e du:8000/plenary.ogg Thanks, -Gokul - Original Message - From: Nancy Anthracite [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2006 12:47 PM Subject: [Hardhats-members] Broadcast of the WorldVistA meeting http://www.jcraft.com/jorbis/player/JOribisPlayer.php?play=http://proxy1. rm u .edu:8000/plenary.ogg This will download the Java run time enviornment and the player for you if you do not have it. If you have it, you can chop off the url after the = sign and paste that into your player. Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=120709bid=263057dat=121642 ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members Using Tomcat but need to do
Re: [Hardhats-members] My Vista won't fit into larger hospital IT network
(salient clip) Kevin Toppenberg wrote: Supposedly in 6 months there is going to be a corporate-wide roll out of some other EMR with lots of bells and whistles. Who knows how that will work out... I havent posted much but have followed hardhats regularly and it is sobering to hear of an innovative VistA deployment, with agile Kevin, being swallowed up by bigger fish from high up on the food chain. When practices form business alliance with hospitals that is exactly what large IT vendors are looking for and those vendors don't leave behind pockets in the network for other genetic material to survive. No diversity, no evolution, and no interconnectedness for big regions of the genome beyond the empire. Other institutions such as a local health department or any freestanding practice are often offered the *opportunity* to buy discounted workstations for the big fix so that they can be compatible outposts locked into the system. Maybe Kevin can remind us of the incremental deployment that is about to be regressed to paper/dictation while waiting for their standardized system. I seem to recall that the focus was primarily on maintaining the record narrative using the existing dictation/transcription services ,but filling the narrative through RPMS (I had thought the viewing tools were CPRS). I don't recall the stages of tiein for lab or pharmacy...and the practice management at Kevin's shop had remained an established legacy system. Now all that will change, but I still hope Kevin will write a summary essay of how well accepted this incremental deployment has been in his practice. Of course the reports of satisfaction at any level cannot stand in the way of *progress* in health care business consolidation. During any future mass *conversions*, this history will be appreciated. Rusty --- All the advantages of Linux Managed Hosting--Without the Cost and Risk! Fully trained technicians. The highest number of Red Hat certifications in the hosting industry. Fanatical Support. Click to learn more http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=107521bid=248729dat=121642 ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
Re: [Hardhats-members] ClearHealth and VistA cordinated effort.
Fred, Isn't it best to concentrate on defining what is common in data dictionaries, to which all developers can map data in and out? I think that practitioners and patients are less interested in hub and spoke models than are the business managers of institutions. Sometimes a choice of software at a hub (such as hospital) causes some institutions and practices out there on the so called spokes to believe there is advantage in running the same software as the hub institution (this shouldn't be the case). That said,a Vista with proper configuration dialogs should be able to run on the spokes in addition to the hub (where the massive VA model also has to be substantially configured or modified at a hospital hub, as Medsphere is doing). As has been discussed elsewhere, there is a mandate to map data to enable a running Vista to cooperate with Free B application for billing. When such mapping is also made available for widely accepted standards of EMR data, it will not only allow patients to move more easily between providers and sites (with different software) it will allow IT persons to support their providers in moving (their data) to whatever software they choose. Of course migrating a whole practice should not be an everyday whim, but it should not be a fearful process either, and perhaps the day will come when even a test drive of a new software could truly run substantial parts of accumulated data, rather than tiny dummy data sets (just a dream). So I don't see any value in declaring what software should operate on spoke as opposed to hub. Software which maintains large portions of data mapped to a common standard will enable the portability of a patient record, but also, portability of users should be a benefit that is not unintended. Then the users will decide what to use. I havn't been able to find Nancy Anthracite's earlier posts on the initiative of the Personal Health Record (is this the correct wording?), but it seems that such data mapping intitiatives are a start for collaboration between differing open-source projects. It certainly is a place for a software to show its tools for moving data in and out. RustyMaynard Fred Trotter wrote: This seems like a good point to discuss the possiblity of a joint ClearHealth-VistA interaction. The advantages of ClearHealth in this situation are as follows. 1. Already deployed and tested in a clinical environment 2. Based on more popular technology, a web consultant could handle the technology with some help from a medical IT person. 3. ClearHealth is on the road to being VistA compatible/component. As I hope everyone can see, by my more and more pestering emails, I really want to see a long term partnership between VistA and ClearHealth. (perhaps something like the quasi-collaborative relationship between Linux and Free/OpenBSD communities) The most obvious example of such a system would be a VistA and ClearHealth hub and spoke system. I envision this as VistA running the more complex Hospital infrastructure, with satellite clinics running ClearHealth with a gateway into the VistA EHR system. As a result ClearHealth would become the clinic window into VistA. Of course I will refrain from making the VistA and Clear to Window pun, but it is tempting :) This situation might be a good opportunity to test this model. ClearHealth is easy to install, I can get it running from source on a fresh server in about five minutes, and if I knew all of the information about a practice I could have a skeleton system up in an about an hour after that (of course knowing the information about a practice could take a day to acquire) What do you think of this Hub and spoke model? generally and in this situation. Again I want to be clear that we have not yet decided exactly what do about this, so do not view this as a statement of our intention, I am just tossing around ideas? Anyone? Regards, Fred Trotter --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Re: [Hardhats-members] VOE and a database to run it. WAS: last value in Y from GETENV
Robert, From your vantage point as VOE technical lead, could you paraphrase the code (as narrative pseudocode) which would enable or disable VOE from running on single user (free license) Cache. Nancy describes this code the VAs license checking routines which can be changed to function properly with the single user version You describe the same code (presumably in regions of ZU and ZOSV) as changes which would be a bypass of license requirements The corollary to my question would be: what code has VOE intentionally included to track its understanding of the Cache license given the possiblity of single license users interested in test/demo uses? Your paraphrase will help me undestand this if you are willing to provide it ... and I have a few related questions: Have you considered adding a popup warning/howto in VOE to encourage *informed* test use? Maybe even include a global for a testing counter report and controls as a part of the new Startup Menu? Where is a well linked web document describing the testing option for those who might interested? Thanks for adding to the discussion, RustyMaynard Robert DeWayne wrote: Please understand that code can always be modified to make VOE work, I did this for one application until I could get a better license. In general I don't recommend this, the changes modifies the code controlling the license tracking issued by Intersytems, I don't consider that a valid option. Which is I why I made the comment that it won't work with the free version. If anyone chooses to bypass license requirements to make it work it is their choice. Robert DeWayne Technical Lead VOE (VistA Office EHR) Daou Systems, Inc. P: (317) 616-4745 C:(317) 727-7477 www.daou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nancy Anthracite Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2005 11:46 AM To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] VOE and a database to run it. WAS: last value in Y from GETENV With some minor changes in the code, it should run just fine, and the changes are comparable to those made in the instructions on Hardhats early on in the instructions. It involves correcting the Box:Volume pair name and fixing the VAs license checking routines to function properly with the single user version. On Wednesday 24 August 2005 08:43 am, Robert DeWayne wrote: Sorry I wasn't more specific, yes VOE will run on the free version of Cache (Cacheweb), but the CPRS GUI will not function. Since the CPRS GUI is what everyone wants to test, then for all practical purposes VOE will not function correctly. The terminal capability will function and therefore the roll and scroll side will work. A great deal of the functionality that VOE incorporates, such as templates and reminders, are more GUI based so looking at the software without the GUI won't show many enhancements. We have been told that if you want to test the VOE software, Intersystems will likely produce a 5 user version that will help you see the strengths of the software. Hope this is a better explanation than before. Robert DeWayne Technical Lead VOE (VistA Office EHR) Daou Systems, Inc. P: (317) 616-4745 C:(317) 727-7477 www.daou.com -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary Monger Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 11:45 PM To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: RE: [Hardhats-members] VOE and a database to run it. WAS: last value in Y from GETENV Unimaginable? No. A single user license is not going to get you full functionality, however I've run FOIA VistA on the free license, and VistA Office should work about the same. I didn't have much trouble, but then I didn't try to do much beyond a little development and testing. If you just want one user to get in and play around, you can probably get by with the free license. I think telnet will only work on the loopback address. I believe the main issue will be how many processes you'll be able to start. I think it's a good idea to contact the vendor. Ask them for a free license that will run it. They will probably give you one. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of David Sommers Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 3:04 PM To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: [Hardhats-members] VOE and a database to run it. WAS: last value in Y from GETENV That seems unimaginable! In order to test the waters, you have to contact a vendor? I know everyone here is shooting for vendor neutrality but I would like to take a small journey down the implementing VOE path. Let's pretend that I have a third-world country (or a friend named Bob) that I would like to help. In the past, I could point them over to (or assist in) setting up Cache/GTM on the server and CPRS on the client. No money down and we can get our feet wet.
Re: [Hardhats-members] Introduction
Peter, Thanks for your introductory post. I'll just say that the programmers on the list are helpful to non programmers such as you or I who havent become so nearly native in communicating with heiroglyphics...and there are many facets to a WV meeting. A recent thread on the list touched on what I snipped from your interests http://sourceforge.net/search/?type_of_search=mlistsforum_id=41331group_id=2386words=human+factors+20thimageField.x=11imageField.y=4 After some meandering on topics of user interface there was mention of the CCR map for VistA as the first iteration in the direction of a larger standardized health record http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=12058245 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=12055578 I think you are in the right place. RustyMaynard Peter Bodtke wrote: snip Alone in the wilds I realized the obvious, that the adoption of a standardized electronic health record (schema) can make a host of health oriented initiatives possible. --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
Re: [Hardhats-members] Forum Mode for Hardhats NOW?
I want to do some summary on this thread plus some points found on other recent threads that are related (disclaiming that I represent any other) *when I initiated this topic I mistakenly thought that VistaOffice would be deploying the *forum* tools at sourceforge, but instead it has been setup as a mailman list and will have forum in its name only (I hope that VistaOffice will convert to *true forum* ex post facto(in consolation for the likelihood that hardhats will keep it's status quo)) * it is observed that increased traffic at hardhats is ominous and it is uncertain if a forum application will make it easier to read the volume of content (or if efficiency for hardhats is substantially a readability problem). * although some posts favor switching to forum, others are neutral, and some are strongly against it, due to simplicity of email * many agree that email reading, and the resulting archive generated, suffers from too much *redundant thread history copying* with differing styles of top posting or bottom posting. This is automated and configured habit on our client tools. (For an *good* example of someone on hardhats who posts with only judicious use of pasted thread copy, sort by Mike Lieman. To see automated,redundant habitual thread copy, look at posting by almost anybody else (including me (except for this post))) *even if hardhats ever converts entirely to a forum there are reasons why OpenForum/VA Forum should not be the choice for interfacing with a variety of newcomer traffic (regardless of its good features or the benefit of its related Vista infrastructure) * it is unclear whether a *forum* application causes participants to be more conscious of presentation (I believe it does, since a forum thread reads more like a transcribed dialogue/multilogue and you don't have to click on links to see all parts of the dialogue in a single document web document) * even if wiki is a special application where participants clearly are building the de facto final appearance of documents, a massive amount of content will continue to reside in the transactions of this hardhats community list or a hardhats community forum. ( therefore the community needs to periodically ask whether its accumulated content is well presented in final form (not just day to day use). Is it easily read in archive form and searchable?) * everyone wants one dependable location for hardhats content (so any partial migration of participants or content to any test platform will likely fail, there can be no gradual transition) (so why change the status quo?) * deciding to move from topicA to another email list was easy. Deciding to change to another application for the entire community (whatever the hoped for benefits) is not easy and can only be asserted by the formal core leaders of a community and those informally recognized by prevailing tradition) ( this thread is only one installment in these types of discussions over time) Well, this is probably my final post on this thread and I hope I have been fair in summary and conjecture... until another installment of this topic on some future thread when someone might dig this thread out of the hardhats archives for reference ...there is no easy reading. Rusty Maynard --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477alloc_id=16492op=click ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
[Hardhats-members] Forum Mode for Hardhats NOW?
I am posting with a specific topic, but want to thank David Sommers for his recent post expressing caution about splitting discussion between the new VistaOffice (which is a forum) and the historically unified hardhats (which of course is a mail list) I don't have a confident answer for that, but I am reviving an older question *will hardhats convert to a forum style* I believe the time to convert is now, although I realize some folks might still prefer the email mode (and if the tools are difficult to maintain identical content in both emaillist and forum application modes, I think forum should be the sole choice) For Friday 7/29 there were about 150 email postings, but volume is not the entire issue. The threads are long (which is proof of effort) and problem solving and teaching is a multifocal conversation necessarily. I think a *forum is much more readable* than a succession of emails, whether in your own cherished mail client or in the archives of hardhats. Email clients and archives require a click to move to each new post and often have confusing styles for the sequence of pasting past copy into a reply. *Forum mode transcends the pasting of prior thread content* and it presents a cleaner read for pasting into your PIM or linking into other sites like wiki etc ( I do wish that the HTML of forum archives treated each forum post as a document anchor for more granular linking) If we believe that our postings should have the discipline to leave a trail of solutions that alone speaks for using a forum archive so that content is more readable by subsequent visitors (not to mention our interacting usage) If it is appropriate to have the OpenOffice/hardhats split according to the guidelines just now posted by Joseph , I think it is all the more important to convert hardhats to forum, if only to handle the additional traffic that will occur on hardhats. That said it's probably valuable to have the forum interface just for readability. Right now there is not a large mass of forum content in the universe of hardhats/worldvista/mumps/gtm to reflect upon, but visit this link as an example of a mature sourceforge project with lots of history to feed newcomers: http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=10226 Pick a thread with 20 or 30 replies and consider its readability. Now read this archive of Hardhats email thread (on the topic of OpenForum) http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10218400 Thanks for David Sommers link to the excellent article on technical tools and social actions http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html Now that the VistaOffice has been given its guidelines and vehicle as a forum, the core group that guides hardhats must face these questions on the mode for handling big traffic at hardhats. I don't know the methods for this decision among venerable hardhats, but after some discussion and some process that probably thankfully won't be called voting...I'm sure everyone can take whatever changes in stride. Rusty Maynard --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477alloc_id=16492op=click ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
Re: [Hardhats-members] Forum Mode for Hardhats NOW?
I am only a relatively recent arrival to the hardhats list and a beneficiary no matter how this content is packaged ...thank you all. The example I offered in the initial post is a link to LEO another type of project but with a strong and disciplined membership. I believe groups are mainly composed of their demeanor and traditions whatever the tools offered them ...but I believe forum offers a better finished product in archives and archiving is important. The sourceforge forums are very searchable just as the email archives are. The basic boolean and/or searching seems as good as I can get out of my large collection of local hardhats email on mozilla. One problem I failed to mention is that your local email is yours and a forum server can be slower. The link provided by David Sommers is excellent reading on group dynamics and it suggests some sort of leadership has to guide changes (whatever form of voting with partial participation or other polling is used in the whole community). In discussion, which is what I intended here, Ruben has spoken out for email lists which is the status quo and I do not categorize email lists and archives as a failure. I continue to advocate a forum for the benefits of a cleaner (and searchable) archive which I believe to be an easier read. Speed of the server is another consideration...but I am considering giving the maintenance of my local client hardhats archive anyway. Thanks for the active list. Rusty Ruben Safir wrote: Forums generally suck. Web tools squash communications and of course, are nothing like the tools for handling email. Nearly ever major programming project has been handled by mailing lists, news groups, and mutt. This and searchable archives are the backbone of collaboration. Finally, MORE mailing lists just means more things I need to sing up to and merge in my mailbox. And please don't look at Open Office for a guild on these kinds of things. They are a complete failure in this regard, and that is before we start to discuss the problems of the product itself. Ruben On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 21:09 -0400, TyrusMaynard wrote: I am posting with a specific topic, but want to thank David Sommers for his recent post expressing caution about splitting discussion between the new VistaOffice (which is a forum) and the historically unified hardhats (which of course is a mail list) I don't have a confident answer for that, but I am reviving an older question *will hardhats convert to a forum style* I believe the time to convert is now, although I realize some folks might still prefer the email mode (and if the tools are difficult to maintain identical content in both emaillist and forum application modes, I think forum should be the sole choice) For Friday 7/29 there were about 150 email postings, but volume is not the entire issue. The threads are long (which is proof of effort) and problem solving and teaching is a multifocal conversation necessarily. I think a *forum is much more readable* than a succession of emails, whether in your own cherished mail client or in the archives of hardhats. Email clients and archives require a click to move to each new post and often have confusing styles for the sequence of pasting past copy into a reply. *Forum mode transcends the pasting of prior thread content* and it presents a cleaner read for pasting into your PIM or linking into other sites like wiki etc ( I do wish that the HTML of forum archives treated each forum post as a document anchor for more granular linking) If we believe that our postings should have the discipline to leave a trail of solutions that alone speaks for using a forum archive so that content is more readable by subsequent visitors (not to mention our interacting usage) If it is appropriate to have the OpenOffice/hardhats split according to the guidelines just now posted by Joseph , I think it is all the more important to convert hardhats to forum, if only to handle the additional traffic that will occur on hardhats. That said it's probably valuable to have the forum interface just for readability. Right now there is not a large mass of forum content in the universe of hardhats/worldvista/mumps/gtm to reflect upon, but visit this link as an example of a mature sourceforge project with lots of history to feed newcomers: http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=10226 Pick a thread with 20 or 30 replies and consider its readability. Now read this archive of Hardhats email thread (on the topic of OpenForum) http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10218400 Thanks for David Sommers link to the excellent article on technical tools and social actions http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html Now that the VistaOffice has been given its guidelines and vehicle as a forum, the core group that guides hardhats must face these questions on the mode for handling big traffic at hardhats
Re: [Hardhats-members] Forum Mode for Hardhats NOW?
Joseph, By forum style do you mean the accumulated archives of an email list? I know that hardhats has a vestigial forum which is not congruent with the wealth of content that will be mined in the regular email list/archives ...it is that mother lode that I am speaking about. I have wrongly assumed that your invitation was to a forum but I now realize that the link is to mailman listinfo for an email list instead. Whether or not there is successful splitting of the community tools, I believe a forum would be a better mode for either of the split. If a mother lode of VistaOffice develops...it would be better served by a true forum for later mining. I have heard of forums that cross post to a mailman archive ...but I have not seen the application that will receive traditional email posts and cross post them to a forum archive * as original copy+signature without redundant thread copy* . What a deal ...everybody presented consistently without automated thread copy in replies (as I am practicing below)! Wiki is yet another paradigm Thanks for your work in making all this commotion. Rusty aka Tyrus Joseph Dal Molin wrote: Tyrus, The current list actually has a web based forum style that can present messages by thread and a couple of other variants.follow the link below to the archive: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members IMHO, anything that is an important thread and needs to be more organized than what we are using now should and deserves to be in a Wiki where it can be turned into something useful. As for the VistA Office EHR list it too is based on Sourceforge and uses the same software as this list. Joseph TyrusMaynard wrote: I am posting with a specific topic, but want to thank David Sommers for his recent post expressing caution about splitting discussion between the new VistaOffice (which is a forum) and the historically unified hardhats (which of course is a mail list) I don't have a confident answer for that, but I am reviving an older question *will hardhats convert to a forum style* I believe the time to convert is now, although I realize some folks might still prefer the email mode (and if the tools are difficult to maintain identical content in both emaillist and forum application modes, I think forum should be the sole choice) For Friday 7/29 there were about 150 email postings, but volume is not the entire issue. The threads are long (which is proof of effort) and problem solving and teaching is a multifocal conversation necessarily. I think a *forum is much more readable* than a succession of emails, whether in your own cherished mail client or in the archives of hardhats. Email clients and archives require a click to move to each new post and often have confusing styles for the sequence of pasting past copy into a reply. *Forum mode transcends the pasting of prior thread content* and it presents a cleaner read for pasting into your PIM or linking into other sites like wiki etc ( I do wish that the HTML of forum archives treated each forum post as a document anchor for more granular linking) If we believe that our postings should have the discipline to leave a trail of solutions that alone speaks for using a forum archive so that content is more readable by subsequent visitors (not to mention our interacting usage) If it is appropriate to have the OpenOffice/hardhats split according to the guidelines just now posted by Joseph , I think it is all the more important to convert hardhats to forum, if only to handle the additional traffic that will occur on hardhats. That said it's probably valuable to have the forum interface just for readability. Right now there is not a large mass of forum content in the universe of hardhats/worldvista/mumps/gtm to reflect upon, but visit this link as an example of a mature sourceforge project with lots of history to feed newcomers: http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=10226 Pick a thread with 20 or 30 replies and consider its readability. Now read this archive of Hardhats email thread (on the topic of OpenForum) http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=10218400 Thanks for David Sommers link to the excellent article on technical tools and social actions http://www.shirky.com/writings/group_enemy.html Now that the VistaOffice has been given its guidelines and vehicle as a forum, the core group that guides hardhats must face these questions on the mode for handling big traffic at hardhats. I don't know the methods for this decision among venerable hardhats, but after some discussion and some process that probably thankfully won't be called voting...I'm sure everyone can take whatever changes in stride. Rusty Maynard --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps
Re: [Hardhats-members] Re: Open Source CPRS using HTTPS SOAP
Thanks for describing how Medsphere is carefully examining its investment in each area of the platform for rich client development. I have these two suggestions about licensing variety. 1. The line in the sand between personal/investigative use and commercial use (which is presumably any deployment in production with monetary exchange). This is often a traditional distinction, but that positioning of the *line* may limit use by a known competitor at the price of stifling possible collaboration between various providers who are not serious competitors, all facing a large and varied pool of demand. It seems to me that commercial deployment *within limits* is exactly the kind of community of users that Medsphere would want to support and favorably license, so that feedback is coming from a variety of installations with their particular goals of vertical application development. To address #1 a license might be limited to a single or (limited number of commercial deployments) as a way to amplify your software investment and network of contact. 2.Community record keeping One would hope that any license where there is a high demand for use would be widely deployed, but perhaps the problem for a pioneer developer is not how much the cat is out of the bag, but how much the pioneer knows about deployment and the potential partners that exist anywhere. This means that some terms of the license should provide means to *know* about deployment. This is in the realm of registration etc. but all of that success depends on the leading pioneer putting into place the database and communication tools for the user community to be known and to know itself...or to assure that the community is doing that in a way that meets the needs of the original creator. I am sure you all deliberate these and many other points of open source more than I .Since you welcomed suggestions in your post, I figured to just voice these two and look forward to your future discussions. Rusty Maynard Todd Berman wrote: On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 15:00 -0700, Jim Self wrote: Todd Berman wrote: As I said before, we are in the process of open-sourcing pieces of our work. I have been involved in a decent amount of meetings over the last couple of weeks that show real progress towards something that will be beneficial to everyone. Can you say yet what parts will certainly be released and what parts will not be or are in question? If there are questions regarding the server or middleware, would they be eased by development of the RPC function on M2Web? The current thinking is to release both the middle-ware and the client. However, the licensing on the two would be very different. We would like everyone to be able to take advantage of the middleware, as it does provide a *lot* of needed functionality (and more going forward). So I believe the current thinking is GPL on that. However, the client itself is much more of a investment for us, and I believe currently we are thinking about going with something like a non-commercial license with very easy licensing terms. There are several reasons for this, which I wont go into deeply here, but mostly it comes down to preventing a company like SAIC to go ahead and snag what we have done. However, this is all speculative at this point, and could change pre-initial release and post initial release. If you have any licensing suggestions, feel free to bring them up. We are still attempting to work through various issues while continuing to actually get *real* work done. --Todd --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members --- SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference EXPO September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices Agile Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects Teams * Testing QA Security * Process Improvement Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
Re: [Hardhats-members] == Question to Bhaskar =
Usha, According to your post on Jul 19 you were using CPRSv 1.0.23.15 to connect to your local Vista Demo. I was never able to connect with 23.15 also when I posted the following to the list back in January: after starting RPC broker the Linux machine is just idling. *until* I connect with CPRS 23-15 which gives Error Encountered Function was: recv Error was:WSAETIMEDOUT which causes the server to go to 97% cpu continuously the D STOP^XWBTCP(9200) fails to stop the process and I have to exit GTM and run mupip stop process However when I installed the modified CPRS which is provided for access to the online VistaDemo, it connects fine with the VistaDemo running locally. I don't know what version that is (or was before modification) and I don't know why its modifications seem to be a prerequisite for access to the running demo. Rusty Usha wrote: Hi I tried to get the VA CPRS demo up and running on our linux server. The only problem with it is that while connecting through CPRS, it displays WSAETIMEDOUT. I have tried removing all the other NULL devices. I have tried disabling the DEFAULT AUTO SIGN-ON in the KERNEL SYSTEM PARAMETERS. But the problem persists... Then I thought of the RPC Broker Debug log. I edited the Enable Broker Logging to verbose (I was unable to run D VIEW^XWBDLOG and D KILLALL^XWBDLOG as they were not available). It said This parameter controls if the RPC Broker records log data in ^TMP(XWBDBUG,$J).. After running CPRS, when I try to see the global ^TMP(XWBDBUG,4277), following is displayed %GTM-E-GVUNDEF, Global variable undefined: ^TMP(XWBDBUG). Can anybody help? Regards Usha - Original Message - From: Mike Lieman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 8:05 PM Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] == Question to Bhaskar = On 7/25/05, Alberto Odor [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have finished configuring GT.M but can't connect to CPRS, the spalshscreen disappears when I press the OK button, without any error message. You know what this sounds like to me? NULL device conflict. Go into VA Fileman and delete everything but the null device for gt.m --- Start Example GTMD Q^DI VA FileMan 22.0 Select OPTION: 1 ENTER OR EDIT FILE ENTRIES INPUT TO WHAT FILE: DEVICE// EDIT WHICH FIELD: ALL// Select DEVICE NAME: null End Example It'll give you a list, pull up the ones that aren't for unix/gt.m, and give them a name of @ that'll delete them. Once they're all gone EXCEPT the GTM-UNIX-NULLBit Bucket (GT.M-Unix) /dev/null entry, give cprs a shot again. Take Care, Mike --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idt77alloc_id492op=ick ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477alloc_id=16492op=click ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members --- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477alloc_id=16492op=click ___ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
