The Atlas project ended up not getting a student for GSoC 2018.
Also, the “Dirty Jobs” (CI, cleaning up on-boarding materials, updating libraries, etc.) sound very appealing.
I think that feature development (sync, OCL) are not in line with the themes.
I’m partial to the Dirty Jobs theme, e.g. cleaning up wiki and guides. But I’m curious: how exactly would funding help? We could contact a technical writer, for example, but would still need to invest time in guiding that person.
Hi all.
Given that we’re like two or so weeks away from a deadline on this, and there are a number of good ideas here, we need to hone these ideas (and others not represented here perhaps) into one or two concepts that we’ll actually focus on.
Can I suggest that @terry lead us through a process of building consensus around what we’ll apply to do?
While she gets back online to help facilitate, it might be a good time community members to represent your potential ideas here in the meantime?
@darius Don’t you think that increasing test coverage, technical backlog grooming, improved/consolidated documentation, training materials and improvements to the software code quality can be applied to Sync 2.0 project development?
We will be discussing this on the leadership team call tomorrow if people are interested in providing verbal input. If not, i think that we go with ‘dirty jobs’. Re comment from @darius - i think that we can guide more easily than doing the rewrite ourselves… (and this will help us get ready for any potential web site redo). @jslawinski - i agree that anything that we do here can be applied (at least theoretically) to Sync 2.0
let us know if there is another 'high priority ’ option to consider.
@darius suggested that we collect a few things from here
as this is exactly in line with “dirty jobs”.
I could come up with a description on Monday if you’d like.
that would be wonderful
@teleivo, please post a link to a Google Doc here. I’ve created a template you can use.
We need to add a NOTICE file to openmrs-core and any modules that might be involved in the work. I’ll start a separate thread around this.
FYI – deadline has been extended to 15 June.
Following up on this:
- The deadline has been extended to June 15
- We have had some interesting suggestions here
- @teleivo has volunteered to write a longer description of his proposal
- @burke has shared a template
Next steps:
- If you feel strongly about an idea, then make a more detailed version of your proposal by filling out the template mentioned in the previous post, by end the end of next week, and share a link to it on this thread
- On June 4 I will consolidate the links to all the detailed proposals, and assuming we have more than one people can vote here in this Talk thread during the week of June 4-10.
- On the June 11 Project Management call we will review the state of proposals and votes.
- If there is no obvious community winner, then participants in the Project Management call will choose. (So, attend this call if you have strong opinions!)
Hello everyone, I’m Maciej Neumann and I work with @jslawinski for SolDevelo. We’ve talked about this grant and we think that maybe it would be better for Sync 2.0 project that we, as SolDevelo, apply for it. It could gave OpenMRS chance to get two grants instead of one and we’ve already have a blueprint for proposal, based on our Digital Square submission:
https://open-proposals.ucsf.edu/digital-square/notice-b/proposal/14308
We don’t want to do anything without your knowledge, so I would be grateful for your opinions about it.
In the instructions they say:
Project leaders should coordinate applications within your open source community, and submit only one single proposal per open source project, representing your community’s best idea
So I don’t think this is a way to get two grants instead of one.
Yes, I think covering those aspects of Sync 2.0 are in-line with the themes.
In their broad guidelines, they include these examples of things they’d want to prioritize, which Sync 2.0 could satisfy:
Proposals to start new multi-stakeholder collaboration for new features or strategies of existing projects.
Proposals to re-invigorating dormant projects of high potential value.
From reading the website, though, I personally think it’s a stronger application if we pitch improvements related to cleaning up the core platform, versus finishing off a promising (but-not-yet-deployed) tool.
But it’s not just up to me; others should share opinions of which proposal OpenMRS should choose to prioritize for this round.
Reminder that if you want to write up a proposal, you should do so by the end of this week. (You can interpret that liberally as “before Darius wakes up on June 4”.)
Here is my proposal (have made it read-only for now, I can/will allow people as editors as needed)
Regarding the requested amount. My wish would be to work on this with at least 2 other developers that work roughly full-time for at least 3 months. I will donate my time. I could give ~1 day/week from September on, less if we start before.
Looking forward to your feedback, thanks a lot! ivo
1 Like
Thanks @teleivo for the awesome work! 
Regarding this comment “we need to add a NOTICE.md to repos involved”, do you mean adding to module repositories?
thanks
I forgot to remove that comment, its still copied over from the original template from burke.
Thanks for doing this @teleivo! Maybe you should make your google doc world-commentable.
My suggestions:
- give some indication of what modules we would focus on ensuring work with the refactoring. (Or were you thinking it would just be opt-in?)
- maybe say that if extra time is available we’ll do an analysis of upgrading to Spring 5.x
Since time is tight, I have gone ahead and done a call for interest on the #implementing:job-board here:
Basically, I’d like to hear who would be interested in working on this, and what they cost, so we can figure out the budgeting.
done
done
I did in the “Please describe the risks” section. I would like to figure that out with the community as I dont know for sure what the best approach is. Either we just pick the reference application or we create our own list/distro of modules (what are the most commonly used modules?). And yes, we could additionally do opt-in to reach out/work together with module devs. This way they could also directly benefit from for ex. Junit 5, …
Most commonly used modules looks right. As in those which are used by almost every distribution, like emrapi, webservicesrest, fhir, owa, idgen, etc
@teleivo I spoke with @darius late last week and offered to help get a budget setup for the submission (since he is out on holiday this week and next). Would you like to work on that together? Or any other aspect to prepare for the submission? What can I do to help?
Hi @janflowers, we have until the 15th and I dont have much time. The
Amount Requested: (US Dollars, maximum $25,000)
is not yet filled out. Would you be able to fill that in?
I can add you to the editors of the proposal I wrote, if you send me your email.
Also I dont know who is going to submit the form, if I should do it I would like to submit on the 14th to make sure we dont miss the deadline.
Thank you very much!
1 Like