Better approach for announcements, forums?
bert.verhees at rosa.nl
Fri Dec 30 11:26:51 EST 2016
I agree that there are some lists which can be combined to technical, as
you say, technical, implementers and ref_impl_java.
That is indeed over-engineering.
But I don't agree on the second part because I think announcements must
be read-only, as a courtesy to the announcer.
And another argument, for example, when you offer a small service,
writing archetypes, giving education, or you write a modeling tool, or
even a book, that kind of things, I don't see that fit in a technical or
It makes it also easy to search the archive for services or products.
Op 30-12-2016 om 15:41 schreef Pablo Pazos:
> IMO we are over-engineering things that can be solved by agreeing on a
> set of rules. We even have two lists technical and implements and
> there might be just one.
> The active members of the community that participate in these channels
> is low. Adding more communication channels will just disperse the
> We need less channels and usage rules.
> On Dec 30, 2016 6:18 AM, "Thomas Beale" <thomas.beale at openehr.org
> <mailto:thomas.beale at openehr.org>> wrote:
> Following from what you and Bert have said, it seems that the
> following could make sense:
> * Foundation announcements list / channel (= openehr-announce
> list we have now)
> * software / libraries / tools announcements (= web home page
> news items with cog icon, also here
> o this includes open source software libs / projects
> * commercial product offerings - currently we don't really have
> a way of doing this, but Industry Partners can post on web
> home page (factory icon)
> I'm not sure what the right approach is, since there are many
> technical possibilities.
> Marcus Baw has proposed moving to Discourse
> <http://www.discourse.org/> as a forum platform - maybe this is
> the kind of thing we should look at?
> - thomas
> On 29/12/2016 17:16, Diego Boscá wrote:
>> Well, we will provide for free a product that was behind a paywall
>> before (LinkEHR lite was the free version we had, and now the 'basic'
>> and free version is the equivalent to the past LinkEHR editor). I'm
>> curious what kind of announcement we could make :)
> openEHR-technical mailing list
> openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org
> <mailto:openEHR-technical at lists.openehr.org>
> openEHR-clinical mailing list
> openEHR-clinical at lists.openehr.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the openEHR-clinical