Gary --
I don't really understand, but it doesn't really matter, I don't do much
with the write guide.
Tell me if what you are doing is anything like what we did back in the
day. We would have the most recent copy of a file in the main folder for
a chapter and then if you reviewed a file you uploaded it to the
feedback folder. Then the maintainer took the file in the feedback,
accepted and rejected and replaced the file in the main chapter folder
with the current one and then deleted the file in the feedback folder.
To me thats sounds like what you are doing, except you aren't leaving
any files in the main folder.
Is that close?
--
Peter Kupfer -- Using OOo since 'OO4 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Want to help? http://www.oooauthors.org
For OOo tips: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/ooo_tips_tricks.html
To order OOo: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/distro/ooo_distro.html
Gary Schnabl wrote:
Peter Kupfer wrote:
Gary & Others --
Maybe I missed this thread during my hiatus, but why do we have two
mailing lists? This seems like it will take more work to stay on top
of things. One of the things I have always enjoyed about the OOo lists
is that they are checkable through an e-mail browser whereas other
lists require me log in to their site to post. With OOo I can check
and respond to all lists without leaving TB.
In that same spirit, the addition of another folder seems like it will
just add more confusion. Maybe it is just me but there should be a
better way. I don't understand what the difference between the two
files you listed below is.
My understanding is that the "Current" copy of the document goes in
the main folder for the guide (in this case the Writer folder) and any
edited copies go in the Feedback folder for that guide. Then, if we
publish a new version, it goes in the published folder. Does that
sound right?
If I am off base and this is better system that is great, it just
seems complicated.
Cheers,
--
Peter Kupfer -- Using OOo since 'OO4 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Want to help? http://www.oooauthors.org
For OOo tips: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/ooo_tips_tricks.html
To order OOo: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/distro/ooo_distro.html
Gary Schnabl wrote:
In keeping with peer review, another folder was created within the
Feedback folder for the Writer Guide for prepublished drafts that
have been both edited and checked against v. 2.0.2. Two forms of
Chapter 7--Working with Styles are there for anybody to review and to
make comments:
(1) an edited working doc with all its editing changes unimplemented
(http://oooauthors.org/en/authors/userguide2/writer/feedback/WriterGuide/0207WG-WorkingWithStyles_21June2006_GS.odt)
and (2) a draft where all its changes were accepted
(http://oooauthors.org/en/authors/userguide2/writer/feedback/WriterGuide/0207WG-WorkingWithStyles_21June2006_GS_Draft.odt).
Place any feedback for Chapter 7 in the new OOoAuthors phpBB forum
under this Writer category:
http://www.createforum.com/phpbb/viewforum.php?f=4&mforum=oooauthors
[New member /jf/ put in a lot of time and effort away from reviewing
into constructing the forum.] The forum would make a better vehicle
for handling smaller matters, in addition to those more serious which
should be covered both via the mailing list and the forum. This way
the mailing list does not get overly burdened with many minor items.
Thanks go out to the eight members for doing the writing and editing
for Chapter 7. There is a pending OOo issue 66535 concerning an error
with the Bullet and Numbering toolbar
(http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=66535a). Also, two
figures still need to be updated.
Gary
That WriterGuide subfolder in the Feedback is for keeping those docs
separate from the erstwhile "final" chapter files after my editing. I
want to avoid adding another not-quite-ready-for primetime "final"
chapter along with the other "final" chapters already in the published
folder. Our definition for "final" is somewhat misleading in that
they're not really "final" because they still need compliance-checking
with the latest OOo version, among other things.
They're in Feedback because those edited changes now are specifically
tossed back for peer review after my editing. I intend to hypertext link
them so that locating them should be easier. Simply click the hypertext
link in the mailing list post used when I put them out for their peer
reviews. Anything in that subfolder is up for critical review...
Gary
