Hi all,
I've added to this post the Debian Med, OpenSuse Medical, Neuro Debian teams, MedFloss manager and the EFMI LIFOSS WG. Also created a new thread.
Le 25 novembre 2011 10:24, Simon Slater pyevet@iinet.net.au a écrit :
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 18:55:15 Sebastian Hilbert wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2011 02:05:11 AM Simon Slater wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 07:02:42 susmit shannigrahi wrote:
But if you really want to make a difference for healthcare put effort into getting people from different distributions together to share their work. Currently we are duplicating work in Debian-med, Fedora-medical and openSUSE- medical. What a waste of human ressources.
I fully agree to this. We should work together. There are lots of projects but no (visible) joined effort. Packaging can be quite different distro to distro but the main work (package selection, upstream contact and management, configuration helpers, license analysis...) can be shared.
We can share our competence whatever are our difference (of Linux distro and project).
Any common forums existing at the moment?
Not yet already.
As a french MD, open source developper and Linux user I'd like to help on any work that can lead to a global "Linux Medical Team" effort (including nurses, dentists, pharmacists...).
Any comment ?
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:08:38PM +0100, Eric Maeker wrote:
I've added to this post the Debian Med, OpenSuse Medical, Neuro Debian teams, MedFloss manager and the EFMI LIFOSS WG. Also created a new thread.
...
But if you really want to make a difference for healthcare put effort into getting people from different distributions together to share their work. Currently we are duplicating work in Debian-med, Fedora-medical and openSUSE- medical. What a waste of human ressources.
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
If you want to make a difference for healthcare work with a group of doctors and technically help them solve local medical needs. Set them up with access to evidence based clinical resources. Maybe help vaccinate a few thousand children in a rural area.
I think your FreeDiams prescriber is a perfect example. Work on making it the best-of-breed FLOSS drug information database. *That* would make a huge difference. Everywhere. Today.
Karsten
Le 25 novembre 2011 13:21, Karsten Hilbert Karsten.Hilbert@gmx.net a écrit :
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 12:08:38PM +0100, Eric Maeker wrote:
I've added to this post the Debian Med, OpenSuse Medical, Neuro Debian teams, MedFloss manager and the EFMI LIFOSS WG. Also created a new thread.
Currently we are duplicating work in Debian-med, Fedora-medical and openSUSE- medical. What a waste of human ressources.
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
Not sure, Debian Med is getting bigger and bigger, MedFloss too. May be we can go one step further ! There are volonteers but they scattered on multiple projects while a more unifying project can arise.
I think your FreeDiams prescriber is a perfect example.
One little piece of the edifice only...
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 05:05:31PM +0100, Eric Maeker wrote:
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
Not sure, Debian Med is getting bigger and bigger, MedFloss too. May be we can go one step further ! There are volonteers but they scattered on multiple projects while a more unifying project can arise.
What would be the precise, medically relevant goal of this project ?
Without one it'd be useless.
Karsten
On 11/25/11 5:32 PM, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 05:05:31PM +0100, Eric Maeker wrote:
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
Not sure, Debian Med is getting bigger and bigger, MedFloss too. May be we can go one step further ! There are volonteers but they scattered on multiple projects while a more unifying project can arise.
What would be the precise, medically relevant goal of this project ?
I fully agree with Eric and would question if we would need a clearly defined medical relevant goal for this endeavor.
First of all I would propose a more general working title: "Free and Open Source Medical Taskforce". Do we just want to limit our collaborative efforts to Linux? Also not-so-free OS can run great FLOSS software and they are still the most widely used in health care.
Is the scope of the task force primarily packaging? Or has it a wider definition?
For packaging I tried to provide at least some help through Medfloss.org. Per project you can specify if it is available through a Linux distro. Out of this a list is created that shows all projects at Medfloss.org that are not yet available through a specific distribution: Debian (http://www.medfloss.org/node/350), Fedora (http://www.medfloss.org/node/351), OpenSUSE (http://www.medfloss.org/node/352).
Not sure if you could think of Medfloss.org of being extended in such a way that it will support better and more effectively any packaging efforts. At least I can state that I would be more than open for any suggestions and willing to provide direct support or help others to get the features they want in Medfloss.org.
What would be the data that shall be available through a central forum or information space?
Cheers,
Holger
Without one it'd be useless.
Karsten
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 08:11:12PM +0100, Holger Schmuhl wrote:
Is the scope of the task force primarily packaging? Or has it a wider definition?
I for myself can perfectly fill my spare time with packaging und Quality Assurance of the packages. For me it would not be very attractive to cut from this time for something that is not targeting a specific downloadable product.
Kind regards
Andreas.
Le 25 nov. 2011 à 20:11, Holger Schmuhl a écrit :
Free and Open Source Medical Taskforce
Hello,
I propose the creation of a common mailing list such as "Free and Open Source Medical Taskforce opensourcemedical@XXX.XX" where all teamsdistro, and other open source medical webportal (medfloss, linuxmednews...) are automatically subscribed.
List that can be registered in each portal of each teams and also here
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open_source_healthcare_software
To ensure its visibility.
This list can be the central place to discuss the common tasks of our different projects, like: - medical or related projects to include/reject..., - common reviewing of apps, - licensing problems around some projects, - upstream contact, - central information about new release and version (may be package too) ...
I suggest someone to take the management of this list. The "manager" will be the one who contact each upstream of our medicals&related project to subscribe and discuss. If no one wants this role, I can take it.
That should not be that hard to do and can be a good start to any collaboration.
Ideas ? Comments ? Suggestions ? Oppositions ?
Thanks ----- Eric Maeker, MD (Fr) http://www.freemedforms.com http://www.ericmaeker.fr
Le 25 novembre 2011 17:32, Karsten Hilbert Karsten.Hilbert@gmx.net a écrit :
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 05:05:31PM +0100, Eric Maeker wrote:
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
Not sure, Debian Med is getting bigger and bigger, MedFloss too. May be we can go one step further ! There are volonteers but they scattered on multiple projects while a more unifying project can arise.
What would be the precise, medically relevant goal of this project ?
Without one it'd be useless.
The very basic reflexion can be the following.
This kind of project involves a too heterogeneous population that we need to precised in more details. I propose two very simple dichotomy:
* The first dichotomy: - the end user - the developper
* In user/developper we have another dichotomy : - working in a (or for a) medical area - not working in a (or for a) medical area
This lead to four profiles that have different needs and wishes.
:) This is quite some cross-posting.
On 11/25/2011 08:39 PM, Eric Maeker wrote:
Le 25 novembre 2011 17:32, Karsten Hilbert Karsten.Hilbert@gmx.net a écrit :
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 05:05:31PM +0100, Eric Maeker wrote:
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
Not sure, Debian Med is getting bigger and bigger, MedFloss too. May be we can go one step further ! There are volonteers but they scattered on multiple projects while a more unifying project can arise.
What would be the precise, medically relevant goal of this project ?
Without one it'd be useless.
The very basic reflexion can be the following.
This kind of project involves a too heterogeneous population that we need to precised in more details. I propose two very simple dichotomy:
The first dichotomy:
- the end user
- the developper
In user/developper we have another dichotomy :
- working in a (or for a) medical area
- not working in a (or for a) medical area
This lead to four profiles that have different needs and wishes.
There are of course idealistic developers that we can guide to find themselves a place in the biomedical world. Yes. Will work. Somewhat. But what we truly want are collaborative full timers that work for maintaining something locally and have difficulties in separating local adjustments (which they are paid for) with long term development (which they happily do) - of the software, of local students and of external volunteers. So, get the Open Source bits used in the real world and with some luck we are set. <rant>The actual platform (I mean Linux/Mac/Windows, not the Linux flavour) should be a non-issue, at least when we take that Freedom of our software seriously.</rant>
My personal perception of a Linux distribution's role is that of a connector of upstream developers among themselves but of course also between them and their creative users. Traditional end user support I would happily see covered by our distros' commercial variants, which is a bit far from happening, I presume. This is why I am so excited about the participation of the most-Open-Sourcy company Eagle Genomics in our January Sprint. Whoever has a problem can talk to them about their biomedical or biochemical issue and have a partner who truly knows how to address things for consultancy or outsourcing. This is for the long term benefit of us all.
The Open Source pure medical side is far less developed from my perception, since the field never got that enormous public funding for Open Source developments. After all, it is about individuals' data and not about public data, but I know I can ask Karsten and Sebastian about everything and they provide Open Source solutions for local doctors themselves. Would be great to see that dispersed nationwide, actually.
To conclude and to give that interaction of upstream developers some extra life, I would like to quickly mention some personal weekend interests of mine:
* save energy and increase performance for routine bioinformatics and cheminformatics services with a push of FPGA computing - ztex.de has its Open Source API in Debian - sciengines.com present theirs at our Sprint * get Linux distros closer to volunteer distributed computing - BOINC server package with functional wrapper - manual proof of concept for AutoDock - Debian package combining the two stalled (any takers?) * get bioinformatics workflow tools to work with the Linux distros so we can bring public web services with local developments/needs together more easily - Taverna joins the Sprint, collaboration on specification of external tools - Tim works on packaging Galaxy - mgltools-vision is in - Laszlo brought Predictprotein.org to Debian * Cloud computing with Debian - Eucalyptus.com joins our Sprint - (Cloud)Bio-Linux organises our Sprint
And then there are various biological ambitions of mine for which I plan using those technologies. I once blogged about them, nothing overly tangible, yet. And everyone brings something in, from which I happily benefit. You may observe that above list contains nothing special about Debian. What is special is us is the community. And when you follow the discussions of mine with the Google Summer of Code organisers of Debian, then you will find that Debian does not like above projects too much. They kicked them out. Google then adopted the BOINC+AutoDock one themselves in their academic partnering organisation of the GOSPO itself, for which they then got a big acknowledgement in the accompanying paper for the PDP 2012. So, we thank the Debian Society for co-funding our Sprint. I think we give quite something back. To Debian, its derivatives, and from above list alone you see that also the other distros immediately profit from our event and from our community.
Your cross-posting is an indication that our community is indeed such: a community. I suggest to wait with any explicit separation for Linux flavours until you receive too many "off-topic" complains. With Debian, we have over a decade kept the Bioinformatics <-> Medical Informatics divide. We are about to close that next yearish with lab information management systems, I presume. And the Debian <-> Ubuntu divide we have closed last year, I think. Let's see what happens respective the .deb <-> .rpm divide. I do not say there are no differences or even difficulties, but those we mostly know or they do not hinder or collaboration on so many fruitful pieces of software.
Best,
Steffen
Hi,
Just wanted to share
http://nebc.nerc.ac.uk/tools/bio-linux/bio-linux-6.0
interesting someone used the same name and created something for openSUSE
They called it openSalux and call themselves BioLinux
http://susestudio.com/a/QhsNUm/open-salux
This is the kind of stuff that is not supposed to happen.
Just one example. How is some outsider looking for an easy way to try great software supposed to diffentiate ?
Regards, Sebastian
On Fri, Nov 25, 2011 at 01:21:18PM +0100, Karsten Hilbert wrote:
While I agree the logical and lofty goal would be to create a "Linux Medical Taskforce" I also know that doing so will not achieve anything tangible.
Over the > 10 years of Debian Med I observed several metaprojects that tried to some extend creating a tasks force or uniting medical care FLOSS projects. I also learned that a lot of these projects did not survived. My personal (unproven) theory is that the reason why those projects become orphaned at some point in time is that they are not bound to some certain code to maintain but rather end up in bits of communication which finally do not lead to a certain result because every participant finally keeps on working on his own project without gaining much from the common discussion.
The difference of Debian Med is that there is a certain amount of maintained code which leads to a new "product" and becomes some use. Another difference is that it does not (strongly) depend from the cooperation of all those different upstream maintainers who might have strong focus on their own project and are not willing / able to spend their time in those meta projects. If its free we just take it (and might ask for help as any other user might do) and include it into Debian. In most cases upstream is happy about this and supports our attempt because we are adding a measurable extra value to the project.
The big advantage we approached with the strategy to stay inside Debian is that we were able to increase the "run-over-by-bus-factor". Just plugging into a distribution which simply survives ensures that our meta project will survive even if some people might go.
Kind regards
Andreas.
peux tu préciser car ça part de partout et j'ai du mal à suivre. Cordialement pmd
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 12:08:38 +0100 Eric Maeker eric.maeker@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've added to this post the Debian Med, OpenSuse Medical, Neuro Debian teams, MedFloss manager and the EFMI LIFOSS WG. Also created a new thread.
Le 25 novembre 2011 10:24, Simon Slater pyevet@iinet.net.au a écrit :
On Fri, 25 Nov 2011 18:55:15 Sebastian Hilbert wrote:
On Friday, November 25, 2011 02:05:11 AM Simon Slater wrote:
On Wed, 23 Nov 2011 07:02:42 susmit shannigrahi wrote:
But if you really want to make a difference for healthcare put effort into getting people from different distributions together to share their work. Currently we are duplicating work in Debian-med, Fedora-medical and openSUSE- medical. What a waste of human ressources.
I fully agree to this. We should work together. There are lots of projects but no (visible) joined effort. Packaging can be quite different distro to distro but the main work (package selection, upstream contact and management, configuration helpers, license analysis...) can be shared.
We can share our competence whatever are our difference (of Linux distro and project).
Any common forums existing at the moment?
Not yet already.
As a french MD, open source developper and Linux user I'd like to help on any work that can lead to a global "Linux Medical Team" effort (including nurses, dentists, pharmacists...).
Any comment ?
-- Eric Maeker, MD (FR) http://www.freemedforms.com/ http://www.ericmaeker.fr/
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FreeMedForms" group. To post to this group, send email to freemedforms@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to freemedforms+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/freemedforms?hl=en.
medical-sig@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
Andreas Tille -
Eric Maeker -
Holger Schmuhl -
Karsten Hilbert -
pierre-marie desombre -
Sebastian Hilbert -
Steffen Möller