Workflow requirements

David asked for comments on workflow, so here is what I want to see. I
don't care what s/w is used, as long as I can track development easily
and without ambiguity.

Preamble

Hi, :slight_smile:

Changing the filename at each stage to show date and
initials also makes it easy to everyone to see what's going on. That's a
bit low-tech, but it works... including when the files have been
downloaded to someone's computer. No accidental overwriting, easy to
tell which file is what.

Personally, I'm not into changing file names as a status indicator.
When you link to them from elsewhere, either the link breaks or
someone gets an obsolete version... Could you possibly suggest another
solution, please? I think I'd prefer a changes-tracking table, or
other equivalent system...

David Nelson

So you won't like the multiple-folders approach either, for the same
reason.

Those are the methods that work for me. Someone else will have to
suggest something different that works for them, with the tools
available (or suggest appropriate free tools to make an alternative
work).

--Jean

Upon reviewing Jean's sage advice, our current in-house setup and the
current modus operandi, I would like to recommend we retool our usage
of the site. I would like to point out that every time we upload a file
with the same name, the files meant for the general public are
changed. This doesn't seem acceptable to me, so I propose we have two
files, one available to the public, and one tagged EDIT or some such.
Anyhoo...

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development Is where I
am located here. As Ron took care of all the rebranding, let's rename
that column to `drafts'. In that column we place a link to our EDIT
tagged file. We rename the next column `feedback'. This gets an
additional state of `back'. `No'== no second person has seen it.
`Back'== a second person has seen it, but has edits and `Yes'== a
second person has seen it and it's ready to progress to the next step.

The third column is renamed to `proofing' and follows the same logic as
`feedback'. When it's state is `Yes' though, it is signed off in the
fourth column, `publish'. This means it's ready to have the EDIT tag
removed. We would need to add a 5th column for sign out.

I propose this to be our interim workflow until we get the `Getting
Started' guide out the door for launch.

Thoughts?

-- jdc

Hi Jeremy, all :slight_smile:

Upon reviewing Jean's sage advice, our current in-house setup and the
current modus operandi, I would like to recommend we retool our usage
of the site. I would like to point out that every time we upload a file
with the same name, the files meant for the general public are
changed. This doesn't seem acceptable to me, so I propose we have two
files, one available to the public, and one tagged EDIT or some such.
Anyhoo...

I considered having two sets of files, but decided that it was
cumbersome and non-optimal. Personally, until we figure out a better,
more permanent workflow, my proposal would be that we just keep one
file set, and that users just get the latest version on the wiki...
it's "quick and dirty", I know, but, IMHO, it's a good interim
solution that users get our currently-best offering of content... What
do you think?

http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development Is where I
am located here. As Ron took care of all the rebranding, let's rename
that column to `drafts'. In that column we place a link to our EDIT
tagged file. We rename the next column `feedback'. This gets an
additional state of `back'. `No'== no second person has seen it.
`Back'== a second person has seen it, but has edits and `Yes'== a
second person has seen it and it's ready to progress to the next step.

The third column is renamed to `proofing' and follows the same logic as
`feedback'. When it's state is `Yes' though, it is signed off in the
fourth column, `publish'. This means it's ready to have the EDIT tag
removed. We would need to add a 5th column for sign out.

I propose this to be our interim workflow until we get the `Getting
Started' guide out the door for launch.

Seems reasonable to me. If no-one has any better proposals than the
above, Jeremy, may I suggest that you please write this up briefly in
a relevant page of our wiki, and make the necessary changes? I'm
working on the site and don't have time or focus right now...
(otherwise, if you don't have time, I can do it ASAP - just after
Christmas, maybe)

Once we get this roughly into shape, I will post back with
suggestions, get you guys' reactions, and then reorganize/move pages
around into a clean, logically-named tree structure (when I finish
with the site, and if someone has not beaten me to it).

David Nelson

Hi Jean, :slight_smile:

So you won't like the multiple-folders approach either, for the same
reason.

Those are the methods that work for me. Someone else will have to
suggest something different that works for them, with the tools
available (or suggest appropriate free tools to make an alternative
work).

I'm not very clear if we're discussing a workflow on the TDF wiki or
on oooauthors.org (which, IIRC, already implements this approach)? If
it's for the wiki, as far as I can see, it can only be implemented as
multiple pages, with multiple file uploads, which might get messy
(wiki is not ideal for this kind of thing)... Could you please explain
a bit more, so I'm really clear about this?

David Nelson

How about putting a big DRAFT in the footer? To be removed when the file is
considered ready to be officially published. That way users are at least
warned that it might not be quite right, and the presence of tracked changes
won't seem quite so strange.

(See the "Free eBook Edition" on the OOo books for an idea of the size and
location of DRAFT I have in mind. I don't think it's on the chapters, just
the full book.)

Hal

blanks.

Hal

This workflow was my wish list for whatever the website is that TDF ends
up with, not necessarily to be set up on the current interim wiki.

Wheatbix wanted to know what Docs' requirements were for the eventual
website, so I've summarised my view of a workable workflow & tracking
system. How it (or similar tracking functionality) is implemented is up
to you website folks.

--Jean

+1
(As a way of making the best of a bad situation.)

Jean

Hi, :slight_smile:

Sometime between Christmas and New Year, I'm going to set up Alfresco
on my own server. I'll invite you guys to take a look... If there is
positive feedback about it, I'll ask Christian if he can install us an
Alfresco sandbox on the Ooodev De server and (if we get an OK for
that) we can try experimenting with it...

David Nelson

Oh, good. I'd love to try Alfresco. I've read about it, and it sounds
very good for our purposes. I hope it works out.

--Jean

Done. Please refer to:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development

-- jdc

Hi Jeremy, :slight_smile:

... please write this up briefly in a relevant page of our wiki, and
make the necessary changes?

Done. Please refer to:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Development

Nice job. Thank you for that. :wink:

David Nelson