Logistimo has released some of their code as open source
Reached out to VillageReach specifically
Misunderstanding that we are interested in doing a lot of implementation on behalf of Logistimo
Spent significant time looking at their features (specifically vaccine requirements) to see if there was much overlap.
Haven't been able to get a demo (they prefer 6-8 hours)
Feature overlaps (vaccine functionality) - they tick the boxes and add functionality
Just now converting their architecture from monolith to microservices
No immediate "wins" in regards to taking and using their code
We're looking to do so as part of asset management
Haven't been able to set up an instance of Logistimo by ourselves
Should we help them do a deeper dive architecturally?
There are some architectural challenges and philosophical differences that may cause challenges
Technical infrastructure - programming language?
Tiers of application stack?
They use Java. Focused on handset first. Web came later. No offline functionality for web piece. They have an API - so we've talked internally.
Open to community to participate - let Tenly know if you would like to participate
Ashraf - VIMS code is also available
Naomi - Could you give an example of what you mean by philosophical differences?
Jake - OpenLMIS was focused on Requisitions
Logistimo - They just cut a PO when someone wants something
MJ - If a customer says "this is how we do things" Logistimo is less likely to make a new feature or respond
Their philosophy is "what is the supply chain best practice" and ask customers to change their SOPs rather than responding
OpenLMIS historically has been focused on automating workflows and matching country practices so it's easier to move into automation
Logistimo is more transactional-based. They are looking to build out more approvals, but there are larger gaps between what we are doing and their
Will need to sort out an interoperability plan in Zambia. Logistimo has a footprint there.
Could repurpose their asset management piece - it will take them a while to get through a re-architecture
What LOE do BMGF and USAID want OpenLMIS to take?
What is the longer term plan?
Anup will be in US in July - nothing on the books planned yet
Kaleb - Let him know about some of BMGF's reorganizational changes
Get something scheduled and can talk later about the times that would be best for teams to meet
Question: Need more clarity on timing, especially as Logistimo starts their re-architecture process? How quickly can they accelerate?
Interesting things to explore philosophically - those may be some of the points where we get hung up
Zambia example, most real world where we have OpenLMIS and Logistimo in play and how those two systems could interoperate together to give them the most complete picture of performance to the government. Would be interesting to hear Anup's perspective on how to reinforce supply chain best practices, and also how to scale beyond India.
Customization and automating workflows that aren't best practice can sometimes hold us up. How do we learn from that as well?
They have been very successful in scaling their system across India - we could learn from that
Preview of COTS - OpenLMIS transition.
Lindabeth: Info on what we're trying to do in Zambia. NSCA (national supply chain assessment) starting a bigger conversation about what supply chain architecture looks like in Zambia. Such an ongoing conversation, would want different players to be part of.
Initiatives are not well linked - correct?
LB - It's still a struggle/ongoing battle. Everyone comes together and agrees on a way forward and then no progress was made. Coming at this as NSCA to try and change the conversation.
Link Josh/Ashraf - They acknowledge that they are new to open source, expertise in community building, they don't have expertise in anything like this. There is a desire in how to sort this out, but no quick wins.
MJ - If we want to be clear (given our timelines), we are moving forward with building the vaccine feature set
Logistimo is a side assessment - we are continuing forward with our feature development
Next Governance call - July 18
Could potentially have Anup participate in then next call (when in town possibly)
MJ - Wanted to flag that whenever we do these feature investigations it slows down our velocity. When we identified asset management, we had to look into it and would have to tackle big tech sets in order to work on that. Is it worth putting feature development on hold with the potential for it not to work? Right now - continuing to build out things ourselves because we didn't identify any quick wins. At some stage we want to figure out how to interoperate/leverage.