ideaman911 wrote on Friday, March 20, 2009:
Brady et al;
Knock me over with a feather when you refer to ME as a "developer". I am better described as a mechanic; I find what needs correcting and model my syntax on what I find around it. Creation from scratch - not a chance ;-) But thanks for the compliment anyway.
Two comments; I agree that the best approach is a single site for downloads with lots of links thereto, but I am unsure that "latest CVS" is always best. By definition that implies "not yet tested by the community", which is scary for novices especially, and could be costly to our overall objective of increasing the community of OpenEMR users. I suggest one each release available of "stable" and "latest" for each of Unix/Linux and Windows environments. That they will be tar and zip respectively is presumed. At this moment the 2.9.1dev seems to be far more "stable" than the 3.0 so far.
The other comment is about fixing the 3.0 to become a “stable”. I think that is essential with all due haste, and avoid rolling in any added 'features" pending that. Implicit in that path is verification both of initial install and of upgrade from the last “release” version dataset being verified for each platform as well, especially as we need to protect current users from data damage.
With that "map", I should also add that we need robust instructions for 3.0 as a complete package. So those with ability should try to make things as simple as possible for the widest community. I suggest we put instructions into a similar "CVS" build approach so contributors could write in subsections, but with a "gatekeeper" who would assure the style was as common as possible before posting. And I would certainly like it to use screenshots. But I would suggest it be downloadable as well, and viewable with the browsers, which will work for either platform (and also Mac).
I think the SunsetSystems approach is an excellent start, but clearly needs updating, especially as relates to added features like CAMOS, GACL and the new Billing/EOB arrangements, but also that the screenshots MUST reflect what users will actually see.
I would suggest, though, that install and upgrade instructions be nearby, but kept separate, as users and installers are likely to be different people. I will happily contribute in whatever part of the above the "owners" think I can best serve. Thanks again.
Joe Holzer