Peter Kupfer wrote:
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
I'm leaving my newly edited files (one has the recorded changes and the
other being the latest draft) in an interim folder prior to their being
dispatched to the published folder. It's an open invitation for my
errors and oversights to be checked and corrected by some volunteer(s).
[There's no regimented procedure for doing the peer review. Hopefully,
somebody will just read or scan it.]
Doing it your way is OK, but there is no further peer review after you
committed your editing.
To satisfy my curiosity and to learn the subject matter in your
about-to-be-published Calc chapter, I'll do a review of it and see. BTW,
feel free to review my edited chapters now and in the future. We don't
operate here with a full-service editing staff, so our errors are bound
to be lying there, waiting to be detected when different pairs (usually)
of eyes are rereading our work.
Gary
