Product: OpenSRP
Website: smartregister.org ⧉
Code repository: https://github.com/OpenSRP/opensrp-client-core ⧉
Current version: v2.0.6-SNAPSHOT
License: Apache-2.0
Sources:
Other names:
  • Open Smart Register Program
Description:
Open source mobile health platform that allows frontline health workers to electronically register and track the health of their entire client population.
Tags: covid-19
Statistics Very Active Repository
Stars

13

Watcher Count

48

Fork Count

24

Current Version

Release 2.0.6

Created

07/18/2017

Last Updated

09/04/2020

Open Pull Requests

18

Merged Pull Requests

377

Organizations
Sectors
Building Blocks
Beta
Beta
SDGs
VALIDATED
Interoperable Products

We don't have any interoperating information for this product.

Included Products
Product Maturity Scores
Overall Maturity Score: 81 / 100

Maturity Categories

Impact, Overall Score: 100 / 100

Indicator: IM20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project should be able to clearly make the case for its importance in the Development and/or Humanitarian sector(s).

Indicator: IM10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project should be used in real applications and not just in demos. Because not all real-world implementations may be inspected publicly, in such cases statements providing as much details as possible about these implementations should be made.

Independence, Overall Score: 100 / 100

Indicator: IN30, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project is not highly dependent on any single contributor. There are at least 3 legally independent contributors (e.g., code committers), and there is no single organization that is vital to the success of the project.

Indicator: IN20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Contributors act as themselves as opposed to representatives of a corporation or organization.

Indicator: IN10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project is independent from any corporate or organizational influence.

Consensus Building, Overall Score: 80 / 100

Indicator: CS50, Score: 100 / 100

Description: All "important" discussions happen asynchronously in written form on the project's main communications channel. Offline, face-to-face or private discussions 11 that affect the project are also documented on that channel.

Indicator: CS40, Score: 100 / 100

Description: In Apache projects, vetoes are only valid for code commits and are justified by a technical explanation, as per the Apache voting rules defined in CS30.

Indicator: CS30, Score: 0 / 100

Description: Documented voting rules are used to build consensus when discussion is not sufficient.

Indicator: CS20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Decisions are made by consensus among PMC members 9 and are documented on the project's main communications channel. Community opinions are taken into account but the PMC has the final word if needed.

Indicator: CS10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project maintains a public list of its contributors who have decision power and some sort of documented governance process.

Community, Overall Score: 100 / 100

Indicator: CO80, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project has an active and diverse set of contributing members representing various constituencies.

Indicator: CO73, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The community has a forum or other discussion platform for users to ask questions, with reasonable response times from the community.

Indicator: CO72, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project's real-time communications are archived so that users can refer back to past conversations.

Indicator: CO71, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project has a well-known real-time communication platform such as IRC.

Indicator: CO70, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project strives to answer user questions in a timely manner.

Indicator: CO60, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The community operates based on consensus of its members (see CS10) who have decision power. Dictators, benevolent or not, are not welcome in Apache projects.

Indicator: CO50, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The way in which contributors can be granted more rights such as commit access or decision power is clearly documented and is the same for all contributors.

Indicator: CO40, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The community is a "holarchy" (see Governance Principles) and over time aims to give more rights and responsibilities to contributors who add value to the project.

Indicator: CO30, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Contributions include not only source code, but also documentation, constructive bug reports, constructive discussions, marketing and generally anything that adds value to the project.

Indicator: CO20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The community welcomes contributions from anyone who acts in good faith and in a respectful manner and adds value to the project.

Indicator: CO10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project has a well-known homepage that points to all the information required to operate according to this maturity model.

Software Quality, Overall Score: 74 / 100

Indicator: QU70, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project must include enough documentation for anyone to test or deploy any of the software.

Indicator: QU100, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project must demonstrate sufficient scalability and document its scalability over various dimensions appropriate to the project.

Indicator: QU90, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project has set up a Continuous Integration pipeline for testing and deployment purposes.

Indicator: QU80, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project must document how it integrates with other OSC Member (or external) projects. Where applicable, the project should be compatible with other active projects.

Indicator: QU71, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project must include enough documentation for a software developer of moderate skill to set up their development environment to contribute to the software code.

Indicator: QU60, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project must include a unit and integration test suite of sufficient 13 coverage, and must document its coverage. Additional performance and scale test capability is desirable.

Indicator: QU52, Score: 0 / 100

Description: Bugs that are ideal for new contributors are labeled as such.

Indicator: QU51, Score: 0 / 100

Description: A list of outstanding bugs is open, easily discoverable, prioritized, and responsively triaged.

Indicator: QU50, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project strives to respond to documented bug reports in a timely manner.

Indicator: QU40, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project puts a high priority on backwards compatibility and aims to document any incompatible changes and provide tools and documentation to help users transition to new features.

Indicator: QU30, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project provides a well-documented channel to report security issues, along with a documented way of responding to them.

Indicator: QU20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project puts a very high priority on producing secure software.

Indicator: QU12, Score: 0 / 100

Description: In particular, there are no custom utility features that could be replaced with common open source tools, including:DatabasesWeb application servers/containersObject relational mappersDependency/package managementAuthenticationContinuous integrationPackaging/installation

Indicator: QU11, Score: 0 / 100

Description: In particular, there are either no "monoliths" or "god classes", or they are known and there is a roadmap to refactor them.

Indicator: QU10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project is open and honest about the quality of its code. Various levels of quality and maturity for various modules are natural and acceptable as long as they are clearly communicated.

Software Releases, Overall Score: 72 / 100

Indicator: RE80, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project has released at least one version.

Indicator: RE70, Score: 0 / 100

Description: The project should use the OSC standard release taxonomy, once that is agreed upon.

Indicator: RE60, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Release plans are developed and executed in public by the community, and approved by the project's governing body.

Indicator: RE50, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The release process is documented and repeatable to the extent that someone new to the project is able to independently generate the complete set of artifacts required for a release.

Indicator: RE40, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Convenience binaries can be distributed alongside source code but they are not official releases -- they are just a convenience provided with no guarantee.

Indicator: RE30, Score: 0 / 100

Description: Releases are signed and/or distributed along with digests that can be reliably used to validate the downloaded archives.

Indicator: RE10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Releases consist of source code, distributed using standard and open archive formats that are expected to stay readable in the long term.

Licenses and Copyright, Overall Score: 67 / 100

Indicator: LC60, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project name has been checked for trademark issues.

Indicator: LC50, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The copyright ownership of everything that the project produces is clearly defined and documented.

Indicator: LC40, Score: 0 / 100

Description: Committers are bound by an Individual Contributor Agreement (the Apache iCLA being an example) that defines which code they are allowed to commit and how they need to identify code that is not their own.

Indicator: LC30, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The libraries mentioned in LC20 are available as Open Source software.

Indicator: LC20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Libraries that are mandatory dependencies of the project's code do not create more restrictions than the project's license does.

Indicator: LC10, Score: 0 / 100

Description: The code is released under one of the preferred copyleft licenses explained in our Licensing Principles.

Software Code, Overall Score: 67 / 100

Indicator: CD60, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The code contains README, NOTICE, and CONTRIBUTING files (or README sections).

Indicator: CD10, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project produces Open Source software, for distribution to the public at no charge.

Indicator: CD61, Score: 0 / 100

Description: A process for claiming bugs is explained in the CONTRIBUTING documentation.

Indicator: CD50, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The provenance of each line of code is established via the source code control system, in a reliable way based on strong authentication of the committer. When third-party contributions are committed, commit messages provide reliable information about the code provenance.

Indicator: CD40, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The full history of the project's code is available via a source code control system, in a way that allows any released version to be recreated.

Indicator: CD31, Score: 0 / 100

Description: Step-by-step instructions for setting up a developer environment is available for all appropriate platforms/operating systems, with a minimum of manual steps (e.g. running commands in a terminal/shell).

Indicator: CD30, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The code can be built in a reproducible way using widely available standard tools.

Indicator: CD21, Score: 0 / 100

Description: The project's code uses mainstream revision control software, such as git.

Indicator: CD20, Score: 100 / 100

Description: The project's code is easily discoverable and publicly accessible.

Software Maturity, Overall Score: 60 / 100

Indicator: Scalability, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Scalability

Indicator: Security, Score: 50 / 100

Description: Security

Indicator: Interoperability and Data Accessibility, Score: 50 / 100

Description: Interoperability and Data Accessibility

Indicator: Software Productization, Score: 50 / 100

Description: Software Productization

Indicator: Technical Documentation, Score: 50 / 100

Description: Technical Documentation

Community Support, Overall Score: 90 / 100

Indicator: Multi-Lingual Support, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Multi-Lingual Support

Indicator: User Documentation, Score: 100 / 100

Description: User Documentation

Indicator: Software Roadmap, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Software Roadmap

Indicator: Community Governance, Score: 50 / 100

Description: Community Governance

Indicator: Developer, Contributor and Implementor Community Engagement, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Developer, Contributor and Implementor Community Engagement

Global Utility, Overall Score: 90 / 100

Indicator: Funding and Revenue, Score: 50 / 100

Description: Funding and Revenue

Indicator: Source Code Accessibility, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Source Code Accessibility

Indicator: Digital Health Interventions, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Digital Health Interventions

Indicator: Country Strategy, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Country Strategy

Indicator: Country Utilization, Score: 100 / 100

Description: Country Utilization

Product classifications
  • Client identification and registration (Source: Digital Health Atlas)
  • Client health records (Source: Digital Health Atlas)
  • Healthcare provider communication (Source: Digital Health Atlas)
  • Referral coordination (Source: Digital Health Atlas)
  • Supply chain management (Source: Digital Health Atlas)
  • Data collection, management, and use (Source: Digital Health Atlas)
Cost data for this product
Lines of Code

91274

Estimated effort (person months)

274

Automatic Launch

Automatically launch an instance this product

Comments
0 Comment

You must login before you can view / post comment.

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more