October 20 2015

Owned by Kevin Cussen (Deactivated)
Last updated: Jan 08, 2016Version comment

Attendance Information

10/20/2015

7AM PDT - Seattle

10AM EDT - New York, DC

4PM CEST - CEST, Geneva, Copenhagen, Joburg

5PM EAT - Dar

Link: https://meetings.webex.com/collabs/#/meetings/detail?uuid=M0J70ISXIREJUUEYZKP26P8RPW-3O29&rnd=10428.504769

Meeting Number: 196 307 742

Host Key: 707674

AGENDA

Current design focus - re-architecture:

  • What are the outputs the Product Committees wants to see from the re-architecture?

Proposed changes to roadmap - No lower level roadmap yet, re-architecture will feed into this

Progress in last sprint, plan for future sprint

Discuss what other types of tools we need to support our committee (shared mailing list, issue tracker, dev wall, etc.), then collaborate to select the tools we want to use. We don't necessarily have to stay with Atlassian, but it is something people already know, and is free. 

Discuss implementations / prospects:

Malawi 

Cote D'Ivoire

Tanzania

Others?

MINUTES

Minutes in italics

Current design focus - re-architecture:

  • What are the outputs the Product Committees wants to see from the re-architecture?
  • Scalability, Extensibility - i.e. the ability for the maintenance of current implementations (migration path) while providing the ability to build new features for new implementations
  • One the re-architecture is complete, implementaters shouldn't have to modify the "core". All new functionality can be built with extension points.
  • The ability to turn modules on and off (Domain driven?)
  • Supporting "best practice" workflows that exist across multiple contexts through configuration (i.e. FEFO, informed push vs. pull, 
    • If countries veer from these "best practices", they would then have to implement their desires in code
  • A clear path to understand what goes into core and what doesn't (for developers)
    • Branch structure helps this decision
    • How do we handle backward compatibility? Should the Product Committee have input on this?
  • Countries find OpenLMIS an attractive proposition
    • Legacy support

If there are features that an implementer believes need to be in core, how do they progress?

  • Is it part of the roadmap?
  • Does the global community have bandwidth to take on the BA / Dev responsibilities or support?

Product Engagement Charter

  • Funded functionality comes up, how do we respond?
    • Align with current functionality or steer a user in a different direction?

Proposed changes to roadmap - No lower level roadmap yet, re-architecture will feed into this

If your features are on the roadmap, you will receive support from the community:

  • Lets be realistic though - if there is a big piece of work that isn't on the roadmap but has funding we should consider support
    • Question becomes, is this part of the domain of OpenLMIS?

Development can happen in parallel as long as the bandwidth exists

If funders sponsor an idea for new functionality, how do we prioritize that against the existing roadmap?

Questions for Governance Group:

In terms of resources at the core/global level - who is going to fund / sustain projects that contribute to core?

Progress in last sprint, plan for future sprint

Discuss what other types of tools we need to support our committee (shared mailing list, issue tracker, dev wall, etc.), then collaborate to select the tools we want to use. We don't necessarily have to stay with Atlassian, but it is something people already know, and is free. 

Discuss implementations / prospects:

Malawi - no timeline at present, however the following requirements have been outlined and may be useful as part of core:

  • Offline requisitions
  • "Best practice" reports
  • DHIS2 Integration

Cote d'Ivoire

Tanzania

Others?

ACTION ITEMS

RECORDING

 

OpenLMIS: the global initiative for powerful LMIS software