Wiki Spaces


Get Help from Others

Q&A: Ask OpenMRS
Discussion: OpenMRS Talk
Real-Time: IRC Chat | Slack


Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


08 December 2011

How To Join

Contact Dawn Seymour for more information on how to join the call.

In Attendance

Paul Biondich
Michael Downey
Hamish Fraser
Darius Jazayeri
Burke Mamlin
Mike Seaton
Chris Seebregts
Dawn Smith
Ben Wolfe



Topic Leader(s)




OpenMRS Core Developer Team: Re-structuring

Mike Seaton



Purpose: Further discuss Mike's email about restructuring the core dev team and their responsibilities
Previous discussion can be found on the previous week's call

NGO Updates

Dawn Seymour, Paul Biondich, and Burke Mamlin



Purpose: Provide updates on the legal counsel review of the Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws


Paul Biondich



Purpose: Talk about a possible Merck collaboration with OpenMRS


OpenMRS Core Developer Team: Re-structuring

    • Paul: We have a proces of collating all the responses form the implementers for features and better understanding that process and how it relates to the sprints.
    • Paul: What can we do different of gathering requests from the community so the end result is keep individuals engaged?
      • Paul: Are we not looking at the requests frequently enough? Are we not prioritizing the needs appropriately?
      • Hamish: One issue is the modules instead of the core that’s having a big impact on our work
      • Paul: There’s been a deliberate attempt to get the core modules in the release. We would sprint on modules the same as the core applications.
    • Dawn: We should collect needed features more often instead of 1x/yr. Even 2-3x/year because things change so frequently
    • Mike: I don’t feel this is a PIH-specific issue, it’s across all implementations. I agree somewhat that there’s more development time on the core and modules, but there’s still a gap there. Look at 1.9 and the attention it gets from the core team over time, but the modules are only given a 2wk sprint and not looked at again. There’s not a commitment over it to make sure things are being achieved.
      • Paul: A 1.10 release could inherit in it new expectations of what the HTML form entry module would do now that it’s in the core release.
      • Paul: core modules mean core. If we’re missing the mark on putting time into the features that need to be added to it, then we need to address it
    • Paul: instead of saying we’re doing reporting module in 1.6 we’re saying here’s the reporting module and the features it needs to have.
    • Mike: we delegate that to the module leads. At the end of the day if the core team is spending their time on TRUNK tickets
    • Darius: I want to echo what Mike said that if we’re to basically say that instead of in January releasing OpenMRS 1.9 we say we’re releasing 12.2 with an ubuntu naming scheme and getting out that entire distribution of OpenMRS.
    • Paul: What you’re asking for Mike is what we want to do as well, but we’re having a hard time of making this happen operationally. In some future state we have a significant percentage of the functionalities that PIH needs is met in the road map

NGO Updates

  • Dawn: IU Legal counsel gave us feedback this morning on the Articles of Incorporation and the Bylaws. The only concern is to make sure the supported organisations are in full agreement to be listed as such and understand the tax implications involved in that role. We should not take a peer to peer conversation as confirmation to add an organisation to the Articles of Incorporation
  • Paul: I think we should keep WHO off the Articles of Incorporation right now because I'm not sure the implications of that role are fully understood within such a large org and the leaders there.
  • Paul: Dawn is drafting a letter to send to Board members as a confirmation of expected roles
  • Paul: The Mozilla lawyer has offered to look over our articles and bylaws


  • Paul: I've cultivated a strategic relationship with Merck. They're looking at healthcare over all not just pharmaceutical companies. I envision an ecosystem in our community where entities like Merck can participate in the development of an open source project to understand secondary use of clinical information. They also can understand our activities such as the Atlas and create a way for companies like Merck to approach implementations direction and build relationships with them.
  • Paul: Merck has been interested in recruiting people for clinical trials, OpenMRS is not a matchmaker in that situation. Merck wants to help us understand where implementations are, and if those implementations opt-in for where they are, Merck could approach those implementations for clinical studies.
  • Paul: This could help implementation sites and Merck as well.
  • Hamish: Merck is interested in understanding groups of patients that may allow them to recruit for clinical trials?
    • Paul: I don't think they have a specific design in mind. They see medical record systems as mainstream activities and using secondary data to answer questions.
  • Hamish: The questions about secondary and research uses of clinical data in OpenMRS is a very light one.
  • Paul: Merck wants to get engaged in a way that doesn't disrupt the community, and Merck wants to find ways to give money for it.
  • Paul: I'm continuing dialogue, but there is nothing set in stone.
  • Hamish: It would be good to identify projects that can collaborate and benefit from this.
  • Paul: Have you seen the Atlas application?
    • Paul: This is a way that an implementation can say through a module that they want to identify ourselves and share information. The contact person is "x". This is something Merck could look at and reach out to those groups.
    • Hamish: It's important to know what the benefits are for Merck.
  • No labels