oship-dev team mailing list archive

[Tim Cook <timothywayne.cook@xxxxxxxxx>]

Luciana,

Thanks for the reply.

The research assistants are not necessarily in my long term plan.  They
are very good to have now.  :-)  But I believe that the open source part
of this will pick up after 1.5 is announced. The proof of concept is
essential for this to happen.  

Both OSHIP 1.x and OSHIP 2.x will be developed and maintained together
for sometime.  Of course my expectation is that the 2.x branch will
attract more development but in the early stages, the 1.x branch is
where we will get more involvement.  Especially so from the openEHR
community; though they are not our target audience. 

Grants are great to hire people.  But I do not base long-term
sustainability on it. 

--Tim


On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 10:47 -0200, Luciana Tricai Cavalini wrote:
> Hi Tim,
> 
> OK, so there it goes, my free thoughts:
> 
> You know that I support the idea of keeping our development as up to
> date as possible with the latest versions of the open source tools we
> use, but what is the cost-benefit of making this move, if we are moving
> to OSHIP 2.0 in a foresseable future and then the framework will have a
> different architecture?
> Of course I support the conclusion of OSHIP 1.x because it is our proof
> of concept as far as the compatibility to the openEHR specification
> goes, but what's our time frame for this 1.6 version? It is the end of
> the year, the research assistants of the project are in a transition
> point of their career, and we need to train and hire more people.
> Taking that into account, it is likely that the 2.0 version of OSHIP
> will be ready before the version 1.6.
> 
> Cheers, Luciana.
> 
> 
> Em 11/12/2010 22:58, Tim Cook escreveu:
> > Hi All,
> > I created this blueprint to start discussion on this.  
> > https://blueprints.launchpad.net/oship/+spec/update2-grok121
> > 
> > I think it is worth the effort to upgrade.  But it is ultimately Diego's
> > call. If we do it now it makes sense because we are still in alpha
> > anyway.   Maybe for a version 1.6 ?  
> > 
> > 
> > Thoughts?
> > 
> > 
> > --Tim
> > 
> > 
> > On Sun, 2010-12-12 at 00:55 +0000, Tim Cook wrote:
> >> Blueprint changed by Tim Cook:
> >>
> >>     Priority: Undefined => Medium
> >>
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~oship-dev
> > Post to     : oship-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~oship-dev
> > More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
> 

-- 
***************************************************************
Timothy Cook, MSc
Project Lead - Multi-Level Healthcare Information Modeling
http://www.mlhim.org 

LinkedIn Profile:http://www.linkedin.com/in/timothywaynecook 
Skype ID == timothy.cook
Academic.Edu Profile: http://uff.academia.edu/TimothyCook

You may get my Public GPG key from  popular keyservers or    
from this link http://timothywayne.cook.googlepages.com/home

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part