On Aug 9, 2012, at 09:14 , Soulliere, Robert wrote: > Hi Dan, > > The "assume it is all good from the last version" approach works for me and > makes things easier for everyone involved. > > The one thing I was concerned about was drastic changes to processes from one > major release to the next. I understand that beta testers should sniff those > out and report issues, but in some cases there seem to be long delays before > some content areas are tested. This could cause frustration for newer users > who rely on precise instructions. Perhaps the "release notes' would cover us > on that and it is better to have faulty docs than no docs at all for that > version?
Perhaps an additional responsibility of the release manager could be to review significant changes to the software and then at least flag the corresponding sections of documentation accordingly, like "Warning: significant changes were made to functionality described in this section from the previous version", or something alike? > > If others are comfortable with the automatically pulling the docs from the > last release, we can set it up to do that. > +1 > Thanks, > Robert > > > > > Robert Soulliere, BA (Hons), MLIS > Systems Librarian > Mohawk College Library > [email protected] > Telephone: 905 575 1212 x3936 > Fax: 905 575 2011 > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] > [[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dan Scott > [[email protected]] > Sent: August 9, 2012 9:50 AM > To: Evergreen Development Discussion List > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] 2.3 Documentation progress. > > Hi Robert: > > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 9:31 AM, Soulliere, Robert > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> I set up Documentation processing for Evergreen 2.3. This is in “Alpha >> mode” and available for review. >> >> It is available in the “Under Development” section of our documentation >> launch page: >> >> http://docs.evergreen-ils.org/ >> >> >> I also added an outline page for folks working on content to update progress >> on chapters and sections: >> >> http://www.open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=evergreen-docs_2.3:outline >> >> You might notice a number of “Can this be pulled from 2.2 content?” notes in >> red. >> >> The content for those chapters are already in 2.2 and are easy to pull into >> 2.3. All I need is for content authors or developers who are familiar with >> the content or development of the features in these chapter to indicate >> “yes” using the outline or the DIG list or launchpad. Then, I can pull it >> in. > > I'm sorry, but I don't think this is a sustainable model. I think we > have to assume that all of the 2.2 content should be pulled into 2.3, > and then deal with the exceptions as they arise. Beta-testers can open > bugs against the documentation if they find discrepancies between what > is documented and what they see in the beta release, but they can't do > that if there's no content to look at. > > Perhaps as part of the Launchpad "pullrequest" and the review process, > we could start flagging areas of the documentation that need to be > changed as new features are added, or as old features are deprecated? > > This E-mail contains privileged and confidential information intended > only for the individual or entity named in the message. If the reader > of this message is not the intended recipient, or the agent responsible > to deliver it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that > any review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication > is prohibited. If this communication was received in error, please > notify the sender by reply E-mail immediately, and delete and destroy > the original message. Alexey Lazar PALS Information System Developer and Integrator 507-389-2907 http://www.mnpals.org/ _______________________________________________ OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION mailing list [email protected] http://list.georgialibraries.org/mailman/listinfo/open-ils-documentation
