7AM PST - Seattle
10AM EST - New York, DC
5PM CEST - CEST, Geneva, Copenhagen
6PM EAT - Dar
Monthly OpenLMIS Governance Committee Call. This meeting includes members of the governance committee, as well as anyone else interested in participating.
WebEx Link: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=MD8GRRT530EZ1G2PBBEH31BOI1-3O29&rnd=9626.4823780
Meeting Number: 194 399 578
US Audio: WebEx Online or +1-415-655-0001
International Audio: WebEx Online
- Tenly Snow to send monthly OpenLMIS update at the end of each month (first to be in February in conjunction with 3.0 release)
- Tenly Snow to share LMIS module info from UiO grad students
Currently, it requires Google Chrome. I have added some test-data (the forms have different names, but same content). The data you save will reset when the index.html (facility list) is opened, but as long as you stay on dashboard, data entry and form summaries, the data is kept.
- Tenly Snow, Brian Taliesin, Carl Leitner to build list of outreach organizations (OpenHIE, BAO Systems → develop strategy for outreach)
- Tenly Snow update Governance charter and post for approval/vote prior to next meeting using Google Groups forum
Expect to deploy to 200 facilities by September.
Chemonics will support its scale up further going forward in 2017 and beyond.
3.0 Release Update
Community Email Update
LMIS module - DHIS2
Chris Wright Have been talking to UiO recently. JSI produced a position paper on the question of whether you use DHIS2/how vs. an OpenLMIS-style solution. People in Oslo are aware that they're aware that they won't be replacing OpenLMIS/complex analysis and visualization in DHIS2. Recognition that better integration and more use cases of DHIS2 and OpenLMIS makes sense when countries get beyond the data entry and need robust logic. Trying to coordinate an "in" being able to guide countries on a maturity model on where the country is at in their various MIS.
Lindabeth Doby - would appreciate an update if JSI is regularly in touch with them. USAID made a decision about ERP in Uganda, part of that request is data capture at the facility level. Very interested in the LMIS tools that are being used to capture data, would rather pull data from the tools that are being utilized there.
What is within our perceived control? What should be the activities of the Governance committee?
We still have multiple instances and versions across countries - how do we communicate as a community that THIS is the version that people should be aware of? As open source, you can use any version you want, but v3.0 is THE version. If you buy into that, this is what you get.
Jake Watson - Leverage is with support. We put out guidance about the go-live of v2. The first version of v3 wouldn't have feature parity with v2. The message is that now that v3 is coming out to support this version, JSI has their branch that they support, CHAI/TW with the ESMS app, TW hasn't asked for a lot of support/haven't needed it.
Carl Leitner - Unclear where the line lies between Product & Governance. Proposed change? That change should go through Governance. Is there a major new feature set? Seems natural for Governance to weigh in on. We don't want to slow down the Product review committee with too much oversight.
Kaleb - Major/minor changes? Agree that Governance should focus on major impact/changes. Flesh out what that means in the criteria.
Lindabeth Doby - What are major changes? Existing implementations would have a difficult time utilizing that? Costs money? Difficult for existing implementations to take advantage of.
Jake Watson - Use case - Malawi. Keen to ensure that the version deployed in Malawi (global version 3) be feature compatible. OL will use semantic versioning, 3 numbers, 3.0.0. Anything that is released under version 3 should be/has to be compatible with versions 3. If Product approaches Governance, needs approval/guidance on v4. No guarantee that v4 would be compatible.
Ensuring there is shared value. Ensuring that country implementations are receiving the full value and features of OpenLMIS, and that community is aware of activities, challenges, and reusability of the tool.
Product would provide report on new feature requests. Product would field new feature requests. Could abstract it into reusable features.
Brian Taliesin - Talking about 3.x platform. 4.x is future state. For 3.x versions, see it as the Product Roadmap and sequencing of suites of features that would allow for additional countries to come into the mix. Roadmap stages what we're ready for (Guinea, Malawi) - Product works to sequence in their functionality. Able to expand OL into the largest # of countries possible. Governance fits it to review sequencing and rollout of Product Roadmap.
Scope for 3.1 - stock management - might be a good proof of concept. Could be a good opportunity, will be discussing that now. Not a discussion of new scope, has been a known quantity for a while. But could give us practice.
New relationships/organizations - Other types of open source orgnanizations. Something that is an issue, something on our radar?
OpenHIE - Critical partnership/outreach effort. Getting LMIS use cases in OpenHIE.
Tim Wood alternate for Gates
Governance committee can see those opportunities as they're coming in, and targeting where that sits on the Product Roadmap. OpenLMIS written into its core, change to feature sets? Would potentially take Product roadmap off its course → right and good thing for Governance. Needs to be sorted out. Where does Governance fit in with sorting out who does what, what is the software set there, how do we get the most people responding to those opportunities, making decisions on behalf etc.
Before our next call, accept these changes, send it out for a vote. Can use the voting structure to make those changes. Get something down, will have to make decisions coming up. Whether or not the current roadmap should persist?