Hi Sebb, Thanks for the comments.
> On Jul 7, 2020, at 12:56 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 at 18:12, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com > <mailto:apache....@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> I'd like some feedback on this proposal. >> >> My objective in this project was and still is to allow members to easily if >> not trivially change their status to emeritus. A secondary objective is to >> make Secretary's work flow as easy as practical. >> >> So, I'd like feedback specifically on having the (request emeritus status) >> button on the member's __self__ page to automatically file the request >> document in emeritus-requests-received and send notice to secretary. >> Secretary would not need to do anything until the 10 day rescission period >> has ended, at which point Secretary would use a tool to make the member >> emeritus. Tooling is not the important feedback request here. >> >> Anyone have an opinion? > > Auto-filing seems OK to me. > > If the member files a second request before the first has been > processed, The roster __self__ tool will not allow filing a second request. The (request emeritus status) button is only available if the user is active without a pending request. [1] So the second request can only occur if the member files a request manually. By sending mail to secretary. Which has never happened during the last 15 years that I've been paying attention. > I think there are 2 options: > - reject the second attempt. > - replace the file with the new one. This may cause the 10 day period to > reset. > > I don't see any value in keeping multiple copies of the request online at > once. > SVN will give access to earlier versions if really necessary. Also, we can consider removing the emeritus-requests-rescinded files after some time to avoid duplicates if the member subsequently files another request that is also rescinded. > > [1] if owner if committer.member.status.include? 'Active' if committer.forms['emeritus_request'] emeritus_file_url = committer.forms['emeritus_request'] _button.btn.btn_primary 'rescind emeritus request', data_emeritus_file_url:emeritus_file_url, name: 'action', value: 'rescind_emeritus' else _button.btn.btn_primary 'request emeritus status', data_emeritus_person_name:@@person.public_name, name: 'action', value: 'request_emeritus' end elsif committer.member.status.include? 'Emeritus' _button.btn.btn_primary 'request reinstatement', name: 'action', value: 'request_reinstatement' end end >> Thanks, >> Craig >> >>> On Jul 6, 2020, at 10:13 AM, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Just one final observation. >>> >>> The emeritus work flow once this PR is merged: >>> >>> Member decides to go emeritus, navigates to their profile, and clicks >>> (request emeritus). This generates an emeritus request document and sends >>> mail to secretary. >>> >>> Secretary receives the mail, reviews the request, and files it in >>> emeritus-requests-received, and sends mail to the member. >>> >>> Ten days (or so) elapse. >>> >>> Secretary remembers that there is a pending emeritus request, navigates to >>> emeritus-requests-received, reviews the documents there, calculates the >>> effective date, and then navigates to the member's profile, double clicks >>> Member status, and clicks (emeritus). >>> >>> This can be improved: >>> >>> 1. The Member status box to (request emeritus) could directly put the >>> request into the proper place in emeritus-requests-received and send mail >>> to the member acknowledging the request. Secretary does not need to be >>> involved at this phase. Member could still rescind the emeritus request >>> without getting secretary involved. >>> >>> 2. The secretary workbench could scan the emeritus-requests-received along >>> with the incoming mail and post a separate list of things to do if there >>> are any pending emeritus requests. If secretary then examines the emeritus >>> request document, actions could include (emeritus) which would then do what >>> Member status does today. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >>> Craig >>> >>>> On Jul 4, 2020, at 2:17 PM, Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I believe this PR is ready for final review. Please let me know if you >>>> have any concerns. >>>> >>>> https://github.com/apache/whimsy/pull/94 >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Craig >>>> >>>> Craig L Russell >>>> c...@apache.org >>>> >>> >>> Craig L Russell >>> c...@apache.org >>> >> >> Craig L Russell >> c...@apache.org Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
