August 29 2017
Last Meeting Notes: August 15 2017
AGENDA
| Item | Lead (Time) | Notes |
|---|---|---|
Software Development Update
| Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) | Ashraf: What performance are we worried about? Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): Right now, the list of line items is long. There is some latency when you are scrolling from left to right. There are too many data elements that it is very challenging to scroll between multiple facilities. There are delays on the screen. Ashraf: If a district has 15 or 20 individual facilities, can this scale if a district has too many facilities? Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): This is the concern, as you add more facilities the performance gets worse. We don’t want to release with this type of delay on the screen. There are ways to make the column width smaller, but it still is a challenge when there are 10 or 15 facilities. Ashraf: Perhaps when you bring it to the core, this should be configurable by program. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): Users can still approve one by one. Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed): Facilities have reported that given the realistic list of products in Malawi the system gets slow. In remote areas where the connection isn’t good and the user has to be offline can be quite challenging. This type or performance improvement should be throughout. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): We have been tracking the performance tickets with a label. We will have a meeting to discuss this in more detail soon. |
Gap Analysis Next Steps Gap Analysis: eLMIS Tanzania & Zambia and OpenLMIS 3.x
| I had rushed the prioritization but now we have more time. Next Governance meeting is Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): I had tried to do a prioritization last week but now we have more time. The next governance committee is Sept 12th. Today I thought it would be useful to go through the requisition and fulfillment features. The features that we identified are ranging between interface features and then reporting. The orange bar is the epic point estimation (not finished yet) and the blue is the number of features. As we move forward with the prioritization, its important that those who aren’t familiar with Tanzania and Zambia implementations review this so they can understand the prioritization. Amanda BenDor (Unlicensed): I was going to talk to Elaine and Carl about this. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): It’s a great idea to figure out how collectively PATH is going to prioritize. But we do need to get the raw data of a representative vote from people in the community about where it sits, and how we are going to make the roadmap. We need everyone to vote so we can see what people are thinking and so we can begin to shape the roadmap. This requires everyone to review these features on their own time. I would like to take the remainder of this meeting to help give folks an idea of where we are. So today I’m going to focus on fulfillment and requisition. Start thinking through what you would vote on. I will send out an email where everyone will select priority from the dropdown. Requisition feature is a low level of effort. For example: Ticket means it’s a ticket level of effort, a small would be 23 tickets in the small size epic. Removing product line items – a user can reduce the list of products they see each time they open the requisition, but they can also add it back if needed. Ashraf: For those of us in the community not familiar with the country context and don’t know why the feature is needed, I encourage you to raise questions so that you understand why this is being asked for. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): In the goals and scope section on each feature, the team provided that context. Please review there and add questions if needed. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): Should we include reports in this prioritization process or do this separately? Gaurav Bhattacharya (Unlicensed): There should be a discussion around how we include certain reports. Identify reports that are absolutely necessary, and then have a second option for all reports. Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed): We should prioritize reports separately. Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): I don’t think there’s been community conversation around the reports with collective agreement. We haven’t prioritized which reports are required or not. Reports feature needs an in person meeting or a more in depth conversation to figure out the approach, and then prioritize. This is my suggestion. Ashraf: An in person meeting might be useful and the right setting to deal with this. OpenLMIS is not just a program that you input data and no output. It’s an important part of the feature and we need to find a viable way to produce the reports and analytics that people expect (using Tableau or other tools). Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated): PC will recommend that Reports needs a separate conversation and in depth review prior to prioritizing. | |
Questions on upcoming work/features: View Requisitions page enhancements: OLMIS-2700 - Getting issue details... STATUS
| Sam Im (Deactivated) (10 min) | |
| Member updates? Upcoming travel or opportunities? |
ACTION ITEMS:
- Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) to schedule a future product committee meeting for a more indepth discussion around product performance tracking in Jenkins
- Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) Schedule a product committee call to discuss the tools used for tracking tests on OpenLMIS
ATTENDANCE:
Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated), Sam Im (Deactivated), Tenly Snow (Deactivated), Nick Reid (Deactivated), Brandon Bowersox-Johnson, Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed), Gaurav Bhattacharya (Unlicensed), Ashraf, Amanda BenDor (Unlicensed), Alfred Mchau
RECORDING:
Video: OpenLMIS Product Committee Meeting-20170829 1549-1.arf (download the WebEx video player here)
ADDITIONAL READING:
The following notes were taken from a call on
Feature Improvement - Skipping and adding products Removing and adding products to the facility type approved product list. Discussion on the "favoriting" of products and experience of skipping and adding back products.
| Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) and would like to hear from someone on the Tanzania eLMIS team and Malawi to understand the request and desired behaviors | Will be discussed on a separate call, see next steps. Notes from the call on Participants: Ashraf, Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed), Christine Lenihan, Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) Ashraf - issues with performance due to the fact of saving lineitems for products that aren't being reported on. Time-consuming. Are we saving all LineItems? Add products back via a button on the top right (not adding to more vertical real estate) (would like the search to do both the code and product name) Should we tie the skip/hide directly to the selection? Most think it isn't needed. Ashraf mentioned they may accidentally select the hide and don't meeting. |
Feature Improvement - Skipping periods Skipping periods. It would be good to hear how Tanzania and Zambia used the skip period button in their implementations. Malawi would like to see a change of permissions. Currently the skip feature is only controlled by program. "In many situations, however, the ability to skip a period would potentially be limited to admins or supervisors at the facility level, so periods did not get skipped in error. The skip function, like the delete function, should have a right assignment within the Create/Submit supervisory role." | Will be discussed on a separate call, see next steps. Notes from the call on Participants: Ashraf, Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed), Christine Lenihan, Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) On an ad-hoc basis: A facility in-charge was on maternity leave and didn't report that month or quarter. Or perhaps they mailed the paper report but somehow it was lost ?! The skip period also needs to be enabled for the facility edition. R&R skip period is used frequently and only program. Christine: Are there ever any scenario where they accidently skipped. Ashraf will follow up with us and show us how they can 're-open' a skipped R&R. Parambir S Gill (Unlicensed) asked about what happens when the requisition&report is late (after the re-open)? Would they still Request Quantities or just fill in the Report side? Ashraf mentioned they may just do the reporting side versus doing the requisitions piece since they may have already placed an emergency requisition. |
OpenLMIS: the global initiative for powerful LMIS software