Software Development Update Roadmap: Living Product Roadmap Current sprint: Backlog Grooming Sprint 109 Upcoming sprint: Backlog Grooming Sprint 110 Release: - 3.4.1 patch release on a performance bug
- 3.5 release scheduled for the end of November
Team stats: https://openlmis.atlassian.net/secure/Dashboard.jspa?selectPageId=12504 Velocity: Context: Includes all four teams. Team performance is impacted by manual testing, regression testing began in Sprint 105, released 3.4 in Sprint 106. 
Key Challenges - Clear definition of what is wanted by the community and implementers.
- Lack a backlog of well defined features.
| Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) (5 min) | What will be in 3.5, check out the Living Product Roadmap - Reporting workstream (can track work here)
- Single Sign on
- Metrics defined (goal is to get metrics created to populate 12 reports)
- Enhancements to superset will most likely be completed by 3.6
- Integrations workstream
- Feature workstream
- Architecture workstream
- Improvements in integrated testing so we can release faster (reduce manual testing). We will have the pattern established and potentially integrated tests for the Requisition Service.
OLMIS-4565
-
Getting issue details...
STATUS
Community requested features |
Update on OpenSRP mobile integration work - What was completed?
- How does the community demo the apk?
| Craig Appl (Unlicensed) (10 min) | - Development is wrapping up by Thursday and Craig will deliver to the VillageReach team early next week
- Documentation development is underway
- Craig Appl (Unlicensed) reviewed the feedback and changed the adjustment form
- Craig will make the APK available online
- Craig will make a video of the end-to-end flow
|
2019 Roadmap A full list of potential features is here. I've pulled out the following four for 2019. Thoughts? - Support for distributions and reallocating stock between facilities (user stories). The OpenLMIS community wants to enhance the local fulfillment workflows to support an end user in planning a distribution to multiple facilities at once and identify excess stock in nearby facilities. If a facility is running low on stock they will have visibility to nearby facilities. These features support a high-value supply chain workflow requested by many current and prospective country users.
- Offline support for stock management features (user stories). There is a need to integrate with third party mobile applications and support offline web browser features. Some facilities will have a desktop computer while others can leverage a tablet device. At the moment OpenLMIS supports online stock management features in the web application and integration with two mobile applications (OpenSRP and SIGLUS). Benin, Malawi, and Mozambique have all expressed the need for offline stock management features so that they can leverage the current desktop computers in facilities with intermittent connectivity. OpenLMIS would like to support both integrations with third-party mobile/tablet applications and offline features within the web application to reach the last mile.
- Collect program data alongside supply chain processes (user stories) to support user-friendly customization of data collection forms by implementers. This work allows collection of health metrics and indicators during supply chain reporting workflows. We propose to build this feature via an integration with a third-party open source application (our specifications to date focus on ODK and/or DHIS2). This featureset allows implementers to collect programmatic data alongside of supply information. The community sees a need for this in HIV and within immunization programs.
- Request, order, receive/unpack and ship “kits”, or bundles of products (user stories). Kits are common within HIV and essential medicines. This feature is a high priority for Mozambique (where implementation work is underway) and requested by other countries because bundling products together is key to supporting reordering for patient regimens and other related products.
| Discussion | Mary Jo has proposed a possible rubric to use to evaluate the list of potential features: - Impacted Role (Storeroom Manager, Administrator, etc)
- Level of Effort (Small, Medium, Large)
- Expected Impact to Adoption (S, M, L)
- Performance Implications (S, M, L, and Positive or Negative)
Are there other considerations that we should use to help us determine what features should be focused on? Craig - Impact to Adoption is critically important for 2019, as well as knowing how long updates would take Specific Features - Ashraf - DHIS2 could be quite valuable
- Ashraf - Offline support through OpenSRP to OpenLMIS
- Ashraf - Support for larger number of products (including offline)
- P Gill - Batch approval performance issues
- Craig - Offline requisitions through OpenSRP (feature parity with SIGLUS)
- Josh - Web UI does already support a lot of this (including offline)
- Mahmudul - Users can download excel templates, fill out offline, then upload monthly. Limits amount of online time required
- Mahmudul - Offline app can store information locally (not in browser cache)
- Craig - SIGLUS has report to show last time that a user synced. Could we create a report to show the last time a user logged in?
- Josh - Some of that should already be in Google Analytics
- Can we check this out in Malawi?
- Sebastian - This should be possible to add in to the data that we are gathering in GA, but we're not doing this now
- Josh - Stock Management: "Decentralized" definition of data
- Centralized: Admin/Super user has to define much of the data used in the Stock Management system
- Currently we support Lot with Expiration Date for item (trade item) data. Perhaps we need to support Expiration Date at commodity level data.
- "De-centralized": would allow a non-admin such as a store room manager, to define some of this data.
- Decentralized and offline combined: data quality issues can/will arise due to typos and syncing
- Automatic Data Capture (barcodes) might be the way to reduce typos. It might be needed anyways to capture this much item data (specific item by gtin, lot number, expiration date, etc).
- Maybe decentralized stock management definitions is impractical in use? Too high of a data-burden.
- Maybe decentralized stock management definition would only be limited to expiration dates of commodity (as opposed to item) data?
- Overall would like to find actual users to understand requirements here.
- Craig - Would be good to think through these potential risks and come up with solutions
|