The source of this thread has been my month long struggles on two different operating systems, including emulation. Let me start by saying that 3.xx installed very smoothly on MacBook Pro running WinXP Pro via Parallels 6.x. My success with that installation, which I deleted since it was not the most current nor “approved” for reimbursement by the feds, turns out to be inversely proportional to mynon-success with xamp-openemr 4.1x, openemr appliance, and openemr. None were successful on the Mac (which got a surge and is now fried) via parallels, or on SnowLeopard with vmware nor virtualbox. None have been successful on the Toshiba satellite that has replaced the MacBook and this computer is running WinHome Premium. I have even tried installing the appliance on this Toshiba via virtualbox, without any success. (FWIW vmware fusion would not even install)
I am not a beginner to computers. Admittedly, I am a beginner to source code. However, with the little bit that I understand it, the php.ini configuration given with the xamp-openemr install is not correct. This conclusion I reach after comparing the directions for configuration of the php.ini given in the installation instructions for OpenEMR 4.1 relative to what is on my computer after downloading and opening XAMP-OpenEMR. This brings me to question where other configurations may have suffered a slip of the keystroke or not been screened fully prior to putting the programs on the web.
So, I need some help with this program. If I should wipe this Toshiba and install WinXP Pro, I would be GLAD {:-q to do so. Otherwise, I am at a loss as to how to proceed.
Sorry to intrude on the post; it is a representation of the magnitude of my frustrations in trying to install this program.
Linda E. Hungerford, M.D., chief IT, physician, groundskeeper and President of
Maple Street Cinic, Ltd.
Not sure about the problem you are stating. Is it that -
1. You are unable to get various virtualizers running on various OS machines.
OR
2. You have tested that the virtualizer works but the OEMR 4.1 appliance does not work.
Either case we should have that discussion on the ‘Help’ forum.
My thoughts are ‘Misleading Links’, ‘Broken Links’, and ‘No Longer Supports OpenEMR’ are reasons for removal (of course, will try to contact the company via email first). Was hoping to get input on the other sections I placed there. For example, should we require a website, a mention of OpenEMR on their website, and a link back to the OpenEMR project (either open-emr.org or oemr.org) from their website?
Brady
While I understand that we need more and more vendors on here to support OpenEMR we should also ask for some sort of credentials from these companies to put their name as commercial supporters. We wouldnt want users to be misled as to the capability of a Vendor just because they managed to put their name on the wiki page.
I would like to propose that they at least have a couple of commits added to the project or give two references of implementation. Even providing custom forms for specialties would be better than nothing. This way we gain at least some contribution to the project or we can put two case studies each on our website. We really need a page for case studies. We could also rank the vendors based on case studies submitted by them.
This way the community will actually benefit and they can prove that they made their bones.
Thanks
Shameem
@Shameem Agree that being listed on the wiki as a supporting vendor implies a form of endorsement and should require confirmation of commitment at least annually.
I agree in principle that link backs and some mention should be required, one issue is with rebranded versions, some of those vendors may not want the track back to the project as they are selling under their own names.
-Tony
I have never been able to get xampp-openemr to work. By this, I mean the package where openemr is already included with xampp and they are configured to work together. Otherwise, I have had no problem installing xampp and then dropping the latest openemr directory in and installing it. I have stuck with 1.7.3 of xampp because there was a problem with more recent versions with OpenEMR. I don’t know if this has been resolved. I have also had good results on OS X with mampp.
I recommend trying different things and stick with what works. You could set up a virtual machine or a separate machine on your network with Ubuntu Linux, for example, and use apt-get to install the required packages (do a Google search for installing LAMP on Ubuntu for easy step-by-step instructions) and OpenEMR will be easy to install.
If a company rebrands OpenEMR, are they an OpenEMR vendor? I think not. They are a vendor for their own product. To be listed on the wiki as an OpenEMR vendor, they should be exactly that.
Jack
OEMR Board
I’d like to help develop, specifically I’d like to help with the security of the project. Where should I start, anyone care to give me a brief run down of where the most data is handled in the source before I get to work?
My thoughts are to ignore whether a entry is rebranded and simply require the following from all entries on the Professional Support page:
1. Web address (that works)
2. Mention supporting OpenEMR on their website and provide a clear link back to the OpenEMR website
The nice thing about having separate open-emr.org and oemr.org site is that it gives oemr.org much more flexibility in dealing with rebranders (which is by far the largest income stream for oemr.org). For example, if part of the deal was to include listing them on the oemr.org site (I have no clue what negotiations take place), then this is fine, but only rebranders that offer to support OpenEMR (and provide link backs on website etc.) will get placed on the open-emr.org Support page.
To address Z&H Healthcare’s issues, I suggest we offer the option for entries on the Professional Support page to their own wiki page linked from their entry (for example, a link/page titled Z&H Healtchcare Code Contributions), which then list all of the features/bug fixes that they have contributed to the official codebase(along with the links to the commits). These would be vital pages that customers/users could use to help decide on choosing a vendor/contractor. This provides the information for these potential/users to look through and avoids any biases from ourselves.
If you’re up for coding a bit, there’s even a security exploit that we have been notified of (will not become public until we place a fix in the next patch); email me at brady@sparmy.com if interested.
Plan to start sending out emails to all the commercial support entities with new list of requirements(only to the ones that are not fulfilling the requirements). Recommend looking at the above wiki link to make sure you are not on those lists; if you are, then suggest modifying your entry. If need more time, just let me know. Guessing we will lose about a third of the entries over the next several weeks…
There are new guidelines for the Professional Support page on the wiki. Note the professional support page is now only on the open-emr.org wiki (the old oemr.org page now forwards to the open-emr.org page); this will now allow us to be more strict on the entries, which will benefit users/customers looking for OpenEMR support/customization/coding.
Will plan to start sending out emails to entries/websites are not fixed and will plan to remove the entries that do not follow the guidelines. Also note the last guideline that gives the option for entities that have contributed code to the OpenEMR codebase to make a separate page to describe their contributions.
When this is complete, this will then make it much easier for users to find paid support/customization/coding.
Still in process of cleaning up the Professional Support Page. I also added the following for entries that have contributed to the official codebase: http://open-emr.org/wiki/index.php/Talk:OpenEMR_Professional_Support#Entries_that_have_committed_code_to_the_official_codebase
(so entries that have done this get the ‘Certified OpenEMR Contributor’ logo)
Let me know your thoughts on this, especially if you think this is a bad idea. Just trying to place more emphasis/credit towards the professional vendors/developers that actually contribute code to the project.