Aw: Re: OpenAPS as in Artificial Pancreas System
> Well, if we try to create a package than we are doing this since we are
> the experts in doing installations and we can do this usually better
> than a random user. We are trying our best to let things perform
> correctly. Imagine we install gpg that way and tell the user that we
> are not sure whether encryption will work correctly and thus he is doing
> on its on responsibility by confirming a debconf question. This does
> not sensible in this case neither does it for OpenAPS.
It doesn't matter much what we think. In this case we will have to
make the user do something very distinctly manually in order to be
able to use the package. Or else this will be a "Medical Device"
and BfArM and FDA etc will shut it down for lack of certification.
However, if I understand things correctly, this openAPS offers _tools_
but not a ready-made solution to run your blood-glucose. So, no
matter how well we install the package, the user WILL have to
write their own monitoring/dispensing loop.
> What we should probably do is asking a lawyer
That is useless for several reasons at several levels.