Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2020 Archives by date, by thread · List index


From previous experience, I have always found that version control is prone to errors because it 
does need a strict regime for everybody to follow. We all have our way of naming files.

The present way of naming files for chapters in the user guides is good, for example 
IG7008-AddingFormattingSlidesNotes. All the filenames need, IMO is the version number adding to the 
filename, for example 01, 02 and so on. That way everybody can easily see which is the latest file 
to use. Version numbers are then removed from the filename when the chapters are published.

No matter what system is used, it needs a strict regime for all volunteers to follow.

Versioning works best when there are multiple contributors working the same document.


Peter Schofield

On 9 Oct 2020, at 07:30, DaveB <> wrote:

On 09/10/2020 02:08, Olivier Hallot wrote:
Hi Dave, All

Em 11/09/2020 11:18, DaveB escreveu:
For the benefit of those who were not part of yesterday's team meeting,
or haven't yet read the minutes. I put forward a proposal as per the
subject line of this post.

A copy of my proposal is available from:
The proposal has 5 points together with my rational for the changes.

If there are no reasonable objections, I propose to start updating our
NextCloud instance on Friday, 18th. September.

Best Regards

I'm bringing a new element to the discussion, related to Version control.

Our infra team added a Version Control plugin to NextCloud.

Each file in Nextcloud is version controlled, including our Guides and
guides components.

Details on the way to use it are in this link:

I think it can be considered in the proposed workflow changes

Kind regards

Hi Olivier, All

Yes we definitely could make use of the versioning system, but there
might be some unforeseen side issues.

Based on my couple of very rudimentary tests, it appears that the names
of the edited/revised and existing files must be 100% identical.
For example:
The *content* of the (fictitious) "GS7001-DB.odt" and "GS7001_DB.odt"
files could be identical, but the NextCloud versioning system would
identify them by the small filename difference as totally separate and
unrelated, so no version control would be applied.
Now if I download "GS7001-DB.odt" edit it and upload without changing
the file name the NextCloud versioning system works as expected.
Although NextCloud will challenge me about an existing file with and
identical name, every time I upload.

See the identical versioned and non-versioned test spreadsheets here:

I am happy to work with the version control system, but it might add a
little extra work for those who, like me, have a local naming procedure
for files on their own system.

There is a possibility confusion arising when it is forgotten that
previous and current filenames must be 100% identical.

I would like to hear the views of other contributors before I move any
further forward on the workflow changes.

Best Regards

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
Privacy Policy:


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.