Hello Peter and Jean, I was reading Jean's comment on the issue, and it's quite worrisome that some dialogs change and we need to keep looking at each one to find, it's impractical. Maybe we can work together with the other teams (UX Team? or QA?) in order to encourage them to give us at least some kind of list of what dialogs have been altered. What do you think?
Best regards, Felipe Viggiano Em ter., 16 de mar. de 2021 às 05:46, Peter Schofield <[email protected]> escreveu: > The pace of software updates is quicker than updating user guides. User > guides have to be checked against the software make sure there is no > glaring omissions in the user guide. > > The release notes for each software release should be more comprehensive. > This would make it easier for LO users to cross refer between release notes > and the latest edition of the user guide. > > User guides should only have a major update when there is a major update > to LO software. Question is — what is a major update to LO software??? > > Regards > Peter Schofield > [email protected] > Technical Writer, LO Documentation Team > > > On 16 Mar 2021, at 06:41, Jean Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Regarding updating guides for minor releases, I do not agree with > focusing > > exclusively on things in the Release Notes. I am finding some differences > > between Writer v7.0 and 7.1 that I consider important for users but are > too > > minor for the release notes. > > > > I do agree that in most cases only one reviewer is enough. > > > > Jean > > > > On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 at 13:07 Rafael Lima <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hello everyone! > >> > >> Here's my take on this subject. > >> > >> I believe that when updating the guides to minor releases (7.1 to 7.4) > we > >> should focus exclusively on the aspects listed in the Release Notes. > Hence, > >> we should take the previously published version (say 7.0 now) and update > >> only chapters and sections that are directly related to something > listed in > >> the release notes. If something was not mentioned in the release notes, > >> then it should remain unchanged. > >> > >> If we follow this guideline, we can reuse previous chapters entirely. > This > >> way, if only a single person reads a chapter and concludes that it has > not > >> been affected by any changes in the release notes, then no further > reviews > >> are necessary and no modifications are made to the chapter. > >> > >> For chapters affected by the release notes, then I believe one person > >> updating it and a subsequent single review will suffice. > >> > >> I think this is a great topic for this week's meeting. > >> > >> Regards, > >> Rafael Lima > >> > >> On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 11:31 PM Felipe Viggiano < > [email protected] > >>> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hello Olivier, > >>> > >>> Considering your arguments, we need, at least, to think about reducing > >> the > >>> cycle review for minor releases reviews. > >>> Kees has a point about the few number of changes in the software to > >>> implement in the guides, and, in my opinion, giving the same treatment > >> for > >>> major and minor releases is consuming most of the team's time. > >>> Maybe reducing the requisites for updating the guides in minor > releases, > >> we > >>> can use the time to work on some other projects. > >>> > >>> Is there any idea from the team to implement a reduced workflow for > minor > >>> releases? > >>> > >>> Best regards, > >>> Felipe Viggiano > >>> > >>> Em seg., 15 de mar. de 2021 às 20:12, Olivier Hallot < > >>> [email protected]> escreveu: > >>> > >>>> Hi Team > >>>> > >>>> I strongly oppose to this approach. > >>>> > >>>> Catching up a full version demands a lot of effort and delays the > >>>> availability of the Guides much after the release of the software. > >>>> > >>>> We had a lot of work to bring our documentation from release 4.x to > 5.x > >>>> and now 7.x . We had to skip some releases because we could not match > >>>> the release pace. > >>>> > >>>> Small updates and frequent publication (6 months) is, as you see, much > >>>> easier to track and provide a good doc for end users. Many chapter > just > >>>> don't need changes and can be fully reused. Other chapters need > >> in-depth > >>>> reviews. > >>>> > >>>> Imagine purchasing the latest proprietary software and get a 2y-old > >>>> manual in a promise that "will soon be available". Of course > >> LibreOffice > >>>> is not a proprietary software and documentation is produced by > >>>> volunteers that have their own tempo. > >>>> > >>>> Software with no documentation is a lesser software. Doc and software > >>>> are components of a product offering. > >>>> > >>>> Producing a new book with small updates is easier, quicker and may not > >>>> require a full cycle review. > >>>> > >>>> My 2 cents > >>>> > >>>> Regards > >>>> Olivier > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Em 14/03/2021 22:19, Felipe Viggiano escreveu: > >>>>> Hello Kees, > >>>>> > >>>>> I was just thinking about that either, perhaps we can focus the > >> review > >>> on > >>>>> the major releases, such as LibreOffice 7, LibreOffice 8 and so on. > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Olivier Hallot > >>>> LibreOffice Documentation Coordinator > >>>> > >> > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe e-mail to: > [email protected] > > Problems? > https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > > Posting guidelines + more: > https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > > List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/ > > Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy > > > -- > To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] > Problems? > https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ > Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette > List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/ > Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? https://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: https://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/documentation/ Privacy Policy: https://www.documentfoundation.org/privacy
