Re: [office] JIRA Work Flow Proposal, was Re: [office] All done

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> wrote on 05/29/2009 10:50:51 AM:

> 
> The proposed flow looks good to me but I have a fairly practical 
question:
> 
> If I mark a comment as "applied," I would expect users to think if they 
> look at the current working draft, the comment *has been* applied. That 
> is that the current working draft is in synch with the status as 
> reflected in JIRA.
> 

Correct, with the realization that the current draft might exist only on 
your hard drive at that time.

> Would anyone object to my simply updating the status of comments in JIRA 

> and then posting a working draft later the same day? Such that any 
> comment marked "applied" will be reflected in a draft dated for the same 

> day?
> 

That's fine with me, but may be more work for you than necessary.  Do you 
think any TC member really will be reviewing editorial changes on a daily 
basis?  Maybe a weekly posting would be sufficient.  But I would recommend 
updating JIRA as soon as you make the change on your copy, while this act 
is fresh in your mind.  We'll need to accept that there will always be 
some delay between when an editorial change is made and when it is posted. 
 JIRA didn't make this happen.  It just makes it possible for us to 
observe this delay in detail.  But the delay was always acceptable before, 
or at least I did not hear any complaints.  So I assume this natural delay 
is still acceptable.

> Granted in my working copy I may be updating comments, particularly 
> those that apply to several areas over a period of days but I will only 
> update the status in JIRA on one day and post that draft later the same 
day.
> 
> Does anyone have a better suggestion?
> 

I'm thinking 'applied' means you or Michael has updated the text or schema 
and it will appear in the next uploaded version of the text.  When the CD 
is approved we can then mark the issue 'closed'. 

-Rob