On 11/2/2014 4:25 PM, Yves wrote:
It sounds as a good practice to comment on both ways. TM2 comments will be missed by the occasional HOT mapper I am. Yves
I am not clear on how I would comment on multiple changesets involved in one task it would take to make sure each contributor got a message.
With the TM I can see the list of people who have contributed to a task some what easily and then @ mention all of them in a validation comment, or I can look at the task in the editor and perhaps see which contributors might need a specific mention and mention those in the validation message.
But I do not think I am going to be going through the changesets to figure out the list of changesets I need to comment on for validation to make sure each person gets a notice and the changeset applies to the comment I send them. i.e., "The changeset you commented on that mentioned squaring builds, doesn't have any buildings in it."
Dealing missed messages via code would be better to me. For example send the validation message to every user who worked on the task automatically, or give us an @ mention shortcut that sends the message to each contributor to the task or allow users to "subscribe" to comments on a task like you can subscribe to comments on a changeset in this change.
I think the changeset comment system is of more use outside of the HOT mapping context where individual changesets might be watched or have meaning to multiple mappers who live in an area vs. hot mapping where individual changesets are less meaningful individually as opposed to a whole collection of changesets that we call a "task".
_______________________________________________ HOT mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/hot
