Hi Peter
Thanks again for the detailed explanation.
It is all clear to me now.
Kind regards, Kees
Peter Schofield schreef op 12.11.2020 10:36:
Hello Kees
You are right.
Creator of a chapter adds their initials to the filename.
Reviewer of a chapter adds their initials to the filename.
Hello Kees
You are right.
Creator of a chapter adds their initials to the filename.
Reviewer of a chapter adds their initials to the filename.
Creator/updater adds their initials to the filename, changes the version number
and moves previous version files to Archive.
Reviewer of 2nd version
Hi Peter
Thanks again.
So the 02 of '02 in Work In Progress' in the Status column means it is
ready fo a second review.
If this would be 01 the first review is not seen by the updater yet.
Am I right?
Hopefully this will be the same for all guides.
Regards, Kees
Peter Schofield schreef op
Hello Kees
Add you name and initials to the spreadsheet. Look at the the spreadsheet for
the Impress Guide 7.0 and you will see what I mean.
Regards
Peter Schofield
psaut...@gmail.com
> On 12 Nov 2020, at 10:14, kees...@libreoffice.org wrote:
>
> Hi Peter
>
> Thanks for your reacton.
> So
Hi Peter
Thanks for your reacton.
So the version number and initials are doing the trick.
But it is not in the Guide status spreadheet.
Regards, Kees
Peter Schofield schreef op 12.11.2020 09:40:
Hello Kees
Add a version number to the filename.
For example
IG7003-AddingFormattingText-01-PS
Hello Kees
Add a version number to the filename.
For example
IG7003-AddingFormattingText-01-PS is the 1st version before review
IG7003-AddingFormattingText-01-PS-SH is the 1st version after review
IG7003-AddingFormattingText-02-PS-SH-PS 2nd version updated after review
All 1st version files are
In the new procedure there is only the WIP folder.
How do we know now when a chapter is ready for a second review.
Regards, Kees
Stephen Fanning schreef op 19.05.2020 10:28:
Hi Kees,
Good question!
If we follow the process, then I think that the tracking spreadsheet
will already have enough
Hi Kees,
Good question!
If we follow the process, then I think that the tracking spreadsheet will
already have enough information. A file should be ready for second review
if:
(1) The first review is complete, indicated by the relevant "Return date"
being populated.
(2) The author has moved the
Hi Steve
One question.
How do we know a file is ready for a second review? Meaning the author
has inspected the proposed changes and had accepts all. Should we add a
notification in the Guide status sheet?
Regards, Kees
Stephen Fanning schreef op 18.05.2020 14:17:
All,
To clarify my own
I am with you Stephen.
Control of the review comment process is necessary, especially with there being
a few volunteers around.
Regards
Peter Schofield
psaut...@gmail.com
> On 18 May 2020, at 14:17, Stephen Fanning wrote:
>
> All,
>
> To clarify my own thoughts and, hopefully, to help
Dear All,
I cannot but agree to the valued proposal of Steve, but would add a
small change to 5 (b):
(b) Author inspects proposed changes and accepts all that are acceptable,
discusses with second_/and first/_ reviewer any significant rejections or
comments that
need resolution.
Thanks for
All,
To clarify my own thoughts and, hopefully, to help anybody else who wishes
to be involved, I have tried to write down the steps involved in updating
and reviewing one chapter of the Calc Guide. Please see below.
(Please note that I am not intending to define the steps involved for any
other
12 matches
Mail list logo
