Minor correction in terminology:"other team members might wish to include some
additional
identification."Should have read:"other team members might wish to include
some additional *oralternative* identification."On 15/09/2020 16:22, DaveB
wrote:Hi Peter,Sounds good. There are a couple of things we need to
clarify/finalise;Would you be kind enough to put forward a proposal for
the file
namingconvention to be used for the new workflow/structure? I would be
happywith something like "GS7001 Introducing LibreOffice #1.odt" but
you andother team members might wish to include some additional
identification.It would be good if the team can reach consensus on this
asap.The 7.0 template needs to be finalised. I will raise a separate
threadabout this.Officially Retired? Good grief, I don't know how I ever
found time
foreveryday work :)))Best RegardsDave-------- Original Message
--------From: Peter Schofield [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday,
September 15, 2020, 13:32 UTCTo: DaveBCc: LibreOfficeSubject:
[libreoffice-documentation] Proposal for a change to theNextCloud workflowHello
DaveI shall trial the new folders for th Draw Guide 7.0 having just
created the skeleton of the guide. In other words, creating
chapters using the 7.0 template and posting in basic
information.It is not so onerous doing the two guides. More than half
go the
Draw Guide is already done. It is called the Impress Guide. Just
have to check all screen shots to make sure they are OK for the
Draw GuideIt keeps me busy now being officially retired.RegardsPeter
[email protected] 15 Sep 2020, at 12:46,
[email protected]:Hi Peter and Team,My responses are given
in-line.-------- Original Message --------From: Peter Schofield
[mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020, 07:50 UTCTo:
DaveBCc: LibreOfficeSubject: [libreoffice-documentation] Proposal for a change
to
theNextCloud workflowHello Dave and SamanthaI am with you and agree
to the proposed changes, despite
having slight disagreement about folders.That's good to know. I am
sure we can find a way to resolve
smalldisagreements.Work in Progress is definitely the
best name for a working folder. Archive folder fits the bill
perfectly.WIP (Work in Progress) seems to be a more accurate
description
of thefolder's purpose and I can think of no good reason to change
the Archivefolder name.File naming is the only thing that
bugs me. Adding the date into the filename is not necessary
and does make it cumbersome.As I said in my reply to Sam, I am
comfortable with whatever
file namingconvention the team reaches consensus on.Adding a version
number (01,02, etc)
to the filename would be insurance IF someone forgets to
move old files into Archive.Sure. Each filename being being unique
is the only thing I
consider tobe important. How that unique identity is defined is for
the
team toagree upon.As I am already working on th Impress
Guide as a whole, I suppose I have editorial control???Also, I am
starting to work on the Draw Guide, which, in
theory, I also have editorial control???The Draw Guide and Impress
Guide are very similar and I am
swapping information between the two guides.Since you have taken on
the (IMO somewhat onerous) task of
almostsingle-handedly rewriting those guides, I doubt that anyone
wouldquestion that you should have editorial control of those
guides.I have been asked to take on the role of "Guide Coordinator"
for version7 of the Getting Started Guide, but I have no intention (or
ability) tosingle-handedly rewrite all the chapters for that guide. I
was
veryimpressed by Steve Fanning's management of the Calc Guide, but
I doubtthat I will be able to make the same level of commitment to
GettingStarted Guide. More on this point in the next few
days.RegardsPeter [email protected] RegardsDaveOn 14 Sep 2020, at
21:09, [email protected]:Hi Sam,Many thanks for your input. My
responses are given in-line
with thepoints in your original message.On 12/09/2020 21:03,
Samantha Hamilton wrote:I think ultimately this is a
discussion about versioning and collaborationin a program
(NextCloud) that is not a collaborative
version control site.I think that simplifying the folder
structure would be
helpful to organizethe iterations of a document, but it would
also mean
that the file namingconvention would be very important for
versioning.Let's move away from the unnecessary complications of file
naming andversioning. The only important point is that each edit
of
a chapter fileis given a unique file name. If having other
identifying
characters inthe file name is what the team wants, I am fine with
that.<br>It doesn't matter if this is the first draft of a chapter,
or the 50thedited review. The file is uploaded to the
Feedback/Work
in Progressfolder and if a previous copy of that chapter file
exists
in theFeedback/Work in Progress folder, that previous copy is
IMMEDIATELYmoved to the Archive folder. At any one time there will
only ever be one(last edited) copy of any chapter file in the
Feedback/Work In Progressfolder of any book and for anyone
wishing to review,
revise or otherwiseedit that chapter this is the file they
take.As far as my understanding goes,
we [would] have a process like this:1. A new/original document
is made by a Creator (this
person has editorial‘control’ over said document)I seem to have
missed the memo about "editorial control".Does this mean:* If I am the first to
start work on a chapter for a new
version of aguide, do I get "editorial control" for just that
chapter
or allchapters for that version of the guide?* If I take on the
role of Guide Coordinator, do I get
"editorialcontrol" of that guide?2. When ready for review it is
put
into the “Feedback” (or “Work in<br>
Progress”) folder, with a naming scheme such as:<br>*guide name
abbreviationversion
numberchapter number_creatorsinitials_date of
submission.extension**For example:* *IG706_AB_1Sept2020.odt*It's unclear what
benefit would be gained from this file
namingconvention. The file will already have a modified date and
theauthor/reviewer is already identified in the status sheet
and the"Contributors" section of the chapter document. As I said
above, "Ifhaving other identifying characters in the file name is
what the teamwants, I am fine with that".3. A Reviewer downloads
a copy
(leaving a copy in the folder) and performsedits, reviews,
etc.4. When complete, the Reviewer uploads the newly edited
file back to thesame “Feedback” folder,Yes and the reviewer
IMMEDIATELY moves any previous copy
to the Archivestorage folder.with a naming convention such
as:=*guide name abbreviationversion
numberchapter number_creatorsinitials_reviewers initials_date of
submission.extension**For example:
IG706_AB_CD_2Sept2020.odt*Please see my previous comments regarding file
naming.5. The Creator accepts, confirms,
or rejects changes as necessary, thensaves this to the
“Feedback” folder as a new file, with
a naming schemesuch as:*guide name abbreviationversion
numberchapter number_creatorsinitials_date of
submission.extension**For example: IG706_AB_3Sept2020.odt*See my previous
comments about "editorial control".6. At the end of this cycle, this
single folder would contain 3 versions ofthe created file. And
would look
like:*IG706_AB_1Sept2020.odt**IG706_AB_CD_2Sept2020.odt**IG706_AB_3Sept2020.odt*No.
My earlier comment: "At any one time there will only
ever be one(last edited) copy of any chapter file in the
Feedback/Work In Progressfolder of any book". All other draft and
review copies
will already bein the Archive storage folder.And then we repeat
the process.
All email messages stay the same, and thestatus spreadsheet
stays the same. This would mean that
until a chapter ispublished we all have access to all previous
copies,
organized by date, andwith contributor identification.My
proposal makes no reference to changing anything other
than thedirectory structure and the workflow on NextCloud. At all
times everyone of us has access to every file in the Documentation
NextCloudinstance and my proposal will do nothing to change
that.Then the files go to the Archives?No. The Archive sub-directory would be a
continuous backup
store for allprevious copies.Dave, is this the process that you
are thinking of?It seems I did a really poor job of documenting
my
proposal.Or am I misunderstanding the use
of the Archive folder?There is nothing special about the
sub-directory having
the nameArchive. It could just as easily be renamed Dump, Backup
or anymeaningful name and still serve the same purpose.All the
best,Sam.Samantha Hamiltondarling
docshttp://www.darlingdocs.comhttps://github.com/samanthahamilton[image:www.linkedin.com/in/shamilton-darlingdocs]http://www.linkedin.com/in/shamilton-darlingdocsBest
RegardsDaveOn Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 8:47 AM
[email protected]:Hi Peter,I am not particularly
concerned about the naming of
files, my only realinterest is that there is a simple
straight forward
and reliable way toidentify the last edition of the file and
where a
previous edition ofthat file exists, it can easily be
researched and/or
recovered.All files with any name difference automatically
acquire a modifieddate, so identification is extremely
simple. Inclusion
of the authorinitials serves no real worthwhile purpose, this
identification isalready taken care of in the status sheet
and the
contributors sectionof every guide chapter. Part of the
reasoning behind
my suggestion thatwe all identify our initials to names on
the status
sheets.If we had even a dozen or more regular contributors
then a rigorous filenaming regime might serve a useful
purpose.Having files stored in just 2 sub-directories
(sub-folders) eliminatesany possibility of the same file
being edited twice.
Personally I don'tgive a "flying fig" what name the folders
are given.
If it were up to meI would name them WIP (Work In Progress)
to hold the
most recentlyedited editions of the files and Archive to hold
previously editededitions. I am yet to be convinced about the
value of
the Publishedfolder, but my view on that point is of no
importance.<br>My one and only motivation is to simplify our
workflow. To mesimplification and ease of understanding of our
workflow is an importantpart of getting and keeping new
contributors involved.
New contributorsare what the team will always need, because
"creaking
old geezers" likeyou and I who understand how things were
done "In the
good ol' days"won't be here forever.OK, I've had my 2c
ramble. Now I will leave it to the
rest of the teamto decide what we do.Best RegardsDavePS. I am
subscribed, to the list so the private mail
is unnecessary :)-------- Original Message --------From:
Peter Schofield [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Saturday, September 12, 2020,
10:38 UTCTo: DaveBCc: LibreOfficeSubject: [libreoffice-documentation] Proposal
for a
change to theNextCloud workflowHello DaveAnother thought to
help in keeping track of files
and this comes fromthe day when I used to earn money in
tech writing.First draft of a file and its filename use a
sequence number and thecreator’s initials, for example
IG7005-ManagingGraphicObjects-01-PS.odt.First review of a
file, the
reviewer adds their initials to thefilename, for example
IG7005-ManagingGraphicObjects-01-PS-DB.odt.Second draft of a
file, the sequence number
increases changing thefilename and the creator adds their
initials, for
exampleIG7005-ManagingGraphicObjects-02-PS.odt.Second review
of a file, the
reviewer adds their initials to thefilename, for example
IG7005-ManagingGraphicObjects-02-PS-DB.odt.When the file is
published, the filename does not
have a sequence numberor any initials added, for example
IG7005-ManagingGraphicObjects.odt.This does give a good
indication of which file is
which and prevents thewrong file from being edited again.
It worked very
well for me and a teamof technical writers.We will agree to
disagree about folder names, but
still think Feedbackis the wrong name to use. A Published
folder is a
definite.RegardsPeter [email protected] 11 Sep
2020, at 16:18,
[email protected]:For the benefit of those
who were not part of
yesterday's team meeting,or haven't yet read the minutes.
I put forward a
proposal as per thesubject line of this post.A copy of my
proposal is available
from:https://nextcloud.documentfoundation.org/s/9FqwWK3m6Cy2zHQThe proposal has
5 points together with my
rational for the changes.If there are no reasonable
objections, I propose
to start updating ourNextCloud instance on Friday, 18th.
September.Best RegardsDave
--
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
