Re: [Audacity-manual] Role of Manual Manager [was: Tracking changes across pages]

[Gale A. <ga...@au...>]

| From Bill Wharrie <bi...@go...> 
| Sun, 26 Feb 2012 11:25:48 -0500
| Subject: [Audacity-manual] Role of Manual Manager [was: Tracking changes across pages]
> Gale wrote:
> > I think that we need a single person who tracks source code changes 
> > to take responsibility for tracking required Manual changes. That 
> > person must read the SVN commits …
> 
> and
> 
> > A good commit message:
> > 
> > "FIXED Bug 2332 (P4): <hyperlink>Memory leaks in Equalisation 
> >   effect (now 20 times faster); 
> >   rewording of EQ buttons (affects Manual)."  
> > 
> > What I AM trying to do is see if we could make a formal system amongst 
> > those working on the Manual for:  
> > 
> > * adding P1/P2 editornotes as soon as code changes are detected 
> >   (unless there are few enough changes to fix them at once)  
> > * make sure the Manual is searched so that nothing that needs to 
> >   change is missed. 
> > 
> > I think the best way is for some single known person to do that, 
> > but if someone has a better idea, please state it. 
> 
> Although this is not what I thought I was signing up for [ :-) ] 
> I'm willing to give it a go, especially if the "improved" commit
> messages are adopted as standard practice.
> 
> I'd set up some way - on my computer -  to track these changes,
> then use the manual P1/P2 system to get the word out. We'll have 
> to see how it works in practice. 

+1 if you are willing, Bill. Indeed it is an extra responsibility and
I wouldn't like anyone to see you as "failing" if one or two still 
got missed, but clearly way too much is getting missed now. 

I hope we can get more people into editing the Manual, so you 
might have less to do in terms of the day-to-day editing that any 
one could do. This might give Ed a break from image czar too. 

James' ideas for providing automated resources that can be 
checked against will really help but I think there will still be
many code changes that can only be picked up by reading the 
commit message and/or checking inside.

Meantime there are things you can do to make checking inside
easier, for example search for: 

    _("

which should show you any string changes (if the line has a "+"
against it to indicate it is replacing the line that has a "-"
against it).   
 
@James, this doesn't IMO rely on being able to edit existing log
descriptions, but better log descriptions going forward would for 
sure make things many times easier and reduce the "misses".  




Gale