Troy: completely agree, and great job on the docs ! [ ** Revised proposal ** ]
* committers use JIRA for doc issues as you see fit but not required for every doc change * ctakes-user requested doc changes ( helps maintain FAQ) DOC issue priority * Blocker: critical doc missing or wrong, for example the User Guide is missing * Major: doc is a incomplete and a frequently asked question, for example UMLS setup * Minor: doc improvement, for example using more concise language to describe a complex topic like components On Dec 4, 2013, at 12:29 PM, "Bleeker, Troy C." <[email protected]> wrote: > Troy deserves a little credit too :) ... > > I agree with the JIRA issues for big context changes, but would caution that > doing so could create a dumping ground for little issues that really should > be changed by anyone in the community who notices. If you see an issue in > the doc and it's relatively minor and you know the answer, then change the > page. > > Troy > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Masanz, James J. > Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 2:22 PM > To: '[email protected]' > Subject: RE: Proposal: Using JIRA to track and request changes to > documentation > > I agree completely about using JIRA for documentation and about adding > Documentation as an Issue Type (looks like JIRA has such a predefined type > that we have not enabled within Apache cTAKES JIRA) > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Tim Miller > Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2013 2:12 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Proposal: Using JIRA to track and request changes to > documentation > > Sounds like a good idea to me. Good for tracking major issues, especially for > targeting future releases and making sure we get the things done we say we > will. Unless there is any way this dramatically violates some convention I > don't see why not! > Tim > > On 12/04/2013 03:11 PM, Andrew McMurry wrote: >> Hi all >> I'll have an update about the VM situation shortly (positive news) but in >> the meantime I propose a new issue type in JIRA: doc. >> >> The ctakes docs are very good, and James deserves a lot of credit. >> User docs are as important as code, sometimes even more so. >> It is therefore appropriate to track how documentation is being updated with >> release versions. >> >> Example of DOC issues worth tracking in JIRA: >> * "Confluence home page still refers to version 3.0 by default" >> * "User FAQ should state recommended JVM memory size" >> * "User FAQ should point to UMLS setup instructions" >> >> As an added benefit, each time we do a release we can see if the docs need >> to be updated accordingly. >> I am *NOT* proposing that every change to documentation requires a JIRA >> ticket. >> But we should have a mechanism to record doc issues. >> >> Do you agree with the proposal? >> >> --AndyMC >
