On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:52 PM, Sam Habiel <sam.hab...@gmail.com> wrote: > Is this the Custodial Agent thing that people have been so enthusiastic about?
> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:43 PM, fred trotter <fred.trot...@gmail.com> wrote: >> I have done a quick analysis by web searches:
This is like the reason the won it. TIAG is an 8a womanowned small and disadvantaged business GSA schedule 70 business with a healthy portfolio providing IT services to the military with skill sets ranging from Clinical Informatics/MD's, to PHD in systems development to highly experienced software and hardware systems engineers.
<nanthrac...@earthlink.net> wrote: > This is like the reason the won it.
> TIAG is an 8a womanowned small and disadvantaged business GSA schedule 70 > business with a healthy portfolio providing IT services to the military with > skill sets ranging from Clinical Informatics/MD's, to PHD in systems > development to highly experienced software and hardware systems engineers.
> On Monday, June 20, 2011, Sam Habiel wrote:
>> Is this the Custodial Agent thing that people have been so enthusiastic
>> about?
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 4:43 PM, fred trotter <fred.trot...@gmail.com> >> wrote:
>> > I have done a quick analysis by web searches:
Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with offers to help.
The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that you think are right.
I would add that it will be equally important for Tiag to proactively engage the community.... collaboration which is at the heart of open source is dance of mutual responsibility.
Joseph Dal Molin President, E-cology Corp. Tel: +1.416.232.1206 Skype: dalmolin
> Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
> This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
> The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the > programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible > for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open > source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA > can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. > It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the > domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
> It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more > likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be > reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm > not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter > who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working > closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy > to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with > Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with > offers to help.
> The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more > contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what > is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really > for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
> If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, > Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other > hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that > you think are right.
If you want that to happen, you need to start by establishing a measure of good will. What I see here is a message of "We don't trust you, but we want you to trust us." That's not a good start.
On Jun 23, 2011, at 1:54 PM, Joseph Dal Molin wrote:
> I would add that it will be equally important for Tiag to proactively engage the community.... collaboration which is at the heart of open source is dance of mutual responsibility.
> Joseph Dal Molin > President, E-cology Corp. > Tel: +1.416.232.1206 > Skype: dalmolin
> On 06/23/2011 12:59 PM, Ralph Johnson wrote: >> Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
>> This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
>> The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the >> programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible >> for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open >> source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA >> can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. >> It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the >> domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
>> It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more >> likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be >> reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm >> not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter >> who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working >> closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy >> to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with >> Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with >> offers to help.
>> The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more >> contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what >> is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really >> for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
>> If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, >> Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other >> hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that >> you think are right.
In my opinion, Prof. Johnson has written a very measured description of the difference of the role to be played by the custodial agent and how it differs from, say, that of architect. For obvious reasons, I don't want to say much here except that jumping to conclusions is really counterproductive for everyone.
> Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
> This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
> The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the > programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible > for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open > source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA > can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. > It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the > domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
> It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more > likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be > reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm > not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter > who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working > closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy > to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with > Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with > offers to help.
> The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more > contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what > is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really > for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
> If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, > Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other > hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that > you think are right.
I believe that there was a TIAG representative at the Fairfax meeting. Information was made available to them, but no one from TIAG has (to my knowledge) reached out to anyone since the meeting. The award had not been announced yet, and the gentleman didn't make much noise or really get into the community discussions (but that could be expected in that this was perhaps his first exposure to this part of the community). So he sat there and just absorbed, (which is what we would hope for someone new to the community to do, listen and take away some gems of wisdom from the community). But in order to be a participating member of our community, it is helpful (especially in their new position as CA) for them to introduce themselves to the community and establish some means of the community to work with them.
Having said this, I would invite them to come and introduce themselves and dispel the darkness of ignorance (ignorance is curable) about their new role in the community and how they see how things might progress with the community at large. How can the VistA Community work with them? Please let us know. Good gates and good fences are a good way to start. There is a lot happening in the VistA Community and hooking into the mainstream could be just the thing that TIAG needs to succeed.
Best wishes; Chris Richardson, Vice President of WorldVistA and one of the founders
> In my opinion, Prof. Johnson has written a very measured description of > the difference of the role to be played by the custodial agent and how it > differs from, say, that of architect. For obvious reasons, I don't want to > say much here except that jumping to conclusions is really > counterproductive for everyone.
> On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Ralph Johnson wrote:
>> Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
>> This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
>> The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the >> programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible >> for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open >> source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA >> can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. >> It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the >> domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
>> It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more >> likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be >> reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm >> not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter >> who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working >> closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy >> to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with >> Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with >> offers to help.
>> The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more >> contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what >> is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really >> for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
>> If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, >> Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other >> hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that >> you think are right.
Those who looked at the RFP know there is a very tight timeline for them to get a number of things in place. I suspect they are extremely busy doing the things that need doing immediately and will then begin to engage with the community.
I will attempt to reach out to them next week.
One concern I have is that the award was supposedly for $5,000,000.
I would not be surprised if 1/3 of that funding is not eaten up just servicing the requirements of the administration and management of a government contract.
The RFP made the testing of software as a task that I thought would be most costly and difficult that the VA expects to be done. Although there are certainly a number of other challenges which should be addressed, I doubt that those that wrote the RFP are sophisticated enough about VistA to consider addressing those things to be a required task and certainly a VistA newbie would be unlikely to plan to take them on or anticipate providing funding for them.
However, even just limiting the tasks to the bare bones of what the VA RFP in its most simplistic terms thinks needs to be done, I found the estimate provided by the VA of the amount of testing that would be requested to be ridiculously low. I think that their capacity to meet the demand will probably be so limited as to make them ineffective in their overall task with that amount of funding unless this testing is to be so limited in its scope that it will not be very useful.
Add to that adapting VistA to be the new EHR for both the DOD and the VA and the DODs top level management's resistance to taking on VistA into the mix, the potential demands for testing new software to function with VistA that may be thrown at TIAG may be enormous.
For TIAG and the community, this is the beginning of an adventure into the unknown and we need to be open and ready to make the best of it.
On Friday, June 24, 2011, r...@rcresearch.us wrote: > To the VistA Community and those who listen in;
> I believe that there was a TIAG representative at the Fairfax meeting. > Information was made available to them, but no one from TIAG has (to my > knowledge) reached out to anyone since the meeting. The award had not > been announced yet, and the gentleman didn't make much noise or really get > into the community discussions (but that could be expected in that this > was perhaps his first exposure to this part of the community). So he sat > there and just absorbed, (which is what we would hope for someone new to > the community to do, listen and take away some gems of wisdom from the > community). But in order to be a participating member of our community, > it is helpful (especially in their new position as CA) for them to > introduce themselves to the community and establish some means of the > community to work with them.
> Having said this, I would invite them to come and introduce themselves and > dispel the darkness of ignorance (ignorance is curable) about their new > role in the community and how they see how things might progress with the > community at large. How can the VistA Community work with them? Please > let us know. Good gates and good fences are a good way to start. There > is a lot happening in the VistA Community and hooking into the mainstream > could be just the thing that TIAG needs to succeed.
> Best wishes; Chris Richardson, > Vice President of WorldVistA > and one of the founders
> > In my opinion, Prof. Johnson has written a very measured description of > > the difference of the role to be played by the custodial agent and how it > > differs from, say, that of architect. For obvious reasons, I don't want > > to say much here except that jumping to conclusions is really > > counterproductive for everyone.
> > On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Ralph Johnson wrote: > >> Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
> >> This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
> >> The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the > >> programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible > >> for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open > >> source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA > >> can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. > >> It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the > >> domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
> >> It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more > >> likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be > >> reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm > >> not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter > >> who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working > >> closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy > >> to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with > >> Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with > >> offers to help.
> >> The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more > >> contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what > >> is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really > >> for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
> >> If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, > >> Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other > >> hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that > >> you think are right.
In the end I suppose that what matters is how many people are
successfully served by all of this. I think if this is what is focused
on and achieved that everything else will take care of itself.
First...there is little doubt that Nancy's assessment of the testing scope and budget dilemma is quite correct. This is a matter of numbers.
Second...there is no reason that pessimism is more viable than an optimism. TIAG has been inserted in a leaership position by our duly established representatives. It is the hand we have been dealt. I cannot help but believe the old "more flies with honey" saying...particularly now.
Third...there is little doubt we, as the community, could as easily approach TIAG as they us. This will be greatly facilitated if there is no "bad blood from pre-emptive mudslinging". I plan to contact TIAG to schedule a meeting to discuss strategy and define cooperative working opportunities.
Fourth...if we claim to accept and follow a different model...see the first point in the list...this could be a golden opportunity to "be the change you hope to see". We might consider teaching our trust model through example and remaining open to learning better processes from their leadership example. Personally, I am impressed with the accomplishments of Mr. Goeringer and look forward to this opportunity to work with him. No doubt he has an agenda but he also has a strong track record of getting things done...as do I...hopefully we will both be positively influenced.
It should go without saying this as a pivotal moment. Maybe we should err on the side of respect and inclusion. Just my opinion, you be the judge.
> Those who looked at the RFP know there is a very tight timeline for them to > get a number of things in place. I suspect they are extremely busy doing the > things that need doing immediately and will then begin to engage with the > community.
> I will attempt to reach out to them next week.
> One concern I have is that the award was supposedly for $5,000,000.
> I would not be surprised if 1/3 of that funding is not eaten up just servicing > the requirements of the administration and management of a government > contract.
> The RFP made the testing of software as a task that I thought would be most > costly and difficult that the VA expects to be done. Although there are > certainly a number of other challenges which should be addressed, I doubt that > those that wrote the RFP are sophisticated enough about VistA to consider > addressing those things to be a required task and certainly a VistA newbie > would be unlikely to plan to take them on or anticipate providing funding for > them.
> However, even just limiting the tasks to the bare bones of what the VA RFP in > its most simplistic terms thinks needs to be done, I found the estimate > provided by the VA of the amount of testing that would be requested to be > ridiculously low. I think that their capacity to meet the demand will probably > be so limited as to make them ineffective in their overall task with that > amount of funding unless this testing is to be so limited in its scope that it > will not be very useful.
> Add to that adapting VistA to be the new EHR for both the DOD and the VA and > the DODs top level management's resistance to taking on VistA into the mix, > the potential demands for testing new software to function with VistA that may > be thrown at TIAG may be enormous.
> For TIAG and the community, this is the beginning of an adventure into the > unknown and we need to be open and ready to make the best of it.
> On Friday, June 24, 2011, r...@rcresearch.us wrote: >> To the VistA Community and those who listen in;
>> I believe that there was a TIAG representative at the Fairfax meeting. >> Information was made available to them, but no one from TIAG has (to my >> knowledge) reached out to anyone since the meeting. The award had not >> been announced yet, and the gentleman didn't make much noise or really get >> into the community discussions (but that could be expected in that this >> was perhaps his first exposure to this part of the community). So he sat >> there and just absorbed, (which is what we would hope for someone new to >> the community to do, listen and take away some gems of wisdom from the >> community). But in order to be a participating member of our community, >> it is helpful (especially in their new position as CA) for them to >> introduce themselves to the community and establish some means of the >> community to work with them.
>> Having said this, I would invite them to come and introduce themselves and >> dispel the darkness of ignorance (ignorance is curable) about their new >> role in the community and how they see how things might progress with the >> community at large. How can the VistA Community work with them? Please >> let us know. Good gates and good fences are a good way to start. There >> is a lot happening in the VistA Community and hooking into the mainstream >> could be just the thing that TIAG needs to succeed.
>> Best wishes; Chris Richardson, >> Vice President of WorldVistA >> and one of the founders
>>> In my opinion, Prof. Johnson has written a very measured description of >>> the difference of the role to be played by the custodial agent and how it >>> differs from, say, that of architect. For obvious reasons, I don't want >>> to say much here except that jumping to conclusions is really >>> counterproductive for everyone.
>>> On Jun 23, 2011, at 9:59 AM, Ralph Johnson wrote: >>>> Dana Blankenhom said "All we can do is hope for the best."
>>>> This is wrong. There is much more that people can do.
>>>> The Custodial Agent is not supposed to be the architect, nor the >>>> programmer, not even the tester. They certainly are not responsible >>>> for gathering requirements. They are supposed to oversee the open >>>> source process, and to create a 'certification' process so that the VA >>>> can get "certified" versions of the system. So, they are managers. >>>> It is better when managers know a lot about the technology and the >>>> domain, but I've seen successful ones that didn't.
>>>> It is possible that there is a nefarious plot afoot, but it is more >>>> likely that Tiag wrote a decent proposal and seemed to the VA to be >>>> reasonably competent and that Tiag would like to do a good job. I'm >>>> not trying to say they were the best candidate. However, no matter >>>> who was appointed, doing a good job at being the CA means working >>>> closely with the existing Vista community and directing their energy >>>> to a common good. So, Tiag probably is expecting to work closely with >>>> Vista experts and would probably welcome people contacting them with >>>> offers to help.
>>>> The plan (that I heard) is that the VA is going to be making more >>>> contracts for work on improving Vista. These other contracts are what >>>> is going to result in major changes to Vista. This contact is really >>>> for running the infrastructure. In Washington circles, $5M is small.
>>>> If the Vista community hangs back and waits to see what will happen, >>>> Tiag is more likely to go off in the wrong direction. On the other >>>> hand, if you engage with them, they are more likely to do things that >>>> you think are right.
