Hello all, I am about to do my proof of concept trial with 2 Quick Starts. I thought I'd choose MapSlicer and Mapbender because both Astrid and Angelos expressed an interest in improving the Quickstarts for their projects :-)
This should give me good practice to see if the GitHub process works out, as well as creating the trac tickets. Before I do anything, here is what I thought the trac ticket might look like - please let me know if any of these values should be different: *Summary = Update the [Project Name] Quick Start *Description = The [Project Name] Quick Start was reviewed by flicstar as part of the Google Season of Docs in October 2019. The high level results of this review are that: - It has an Overview, Procedure and Things to Try section - which is good. - It is missing the Next Steps section and requires minor updates in the Procedure section. Please see comments in GitHub on this PR: <Insert PR link> *Type = Task *Priority = Normal *Milestone = OSGeoLive 14.0 *Component = Documentation (or OSGeoLive?) *Keywords - should I add a keyword (like "documentation")? *Will I assign it to an owner - like the contact person for the project? Is there a bulk way to create trac tickets? Thanks Felicity On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 6:22 PM Cameron Shorter <cameron.shor...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Felicity, > > Re labels, I don't feel strongly about whether we use them or not, but > whatever we do, we aim to be consistent, and document our decision in our > Quickstart template. I'd probably err on: > > 1. Adopting whatever is commonly used by all projects. > > 2. Keeping our use of labels simple (ie, not have them if it is not adding > much value). > > -- > > Your suggestions for raising 50 trac tickets and 50 pull requests sound > reasonable for me. I suggest doing one top-to-bottom and get feedback before > continuing with the rest. > > Also, after reviewing a project's Quickstart, I suggest sending a direct > email to that project's point of contact(s). Most don't monitor the OSGeoLive > email list closely and will appreciate the email. > > You will also get a range of opinions on how hands on each person will be > with their project. Some will accept every suggestion you make. Others will > take it as guidance and then rewrite. > > Cheers, Cameron > > On 7/10/19 6:10 pm, Nicolas Roelandt wrote: > > Hi Felicity, > > Thanks for working on this and asking things ! > > For the Sphinx markup, I don't have a good response. I did like it was made > as it is part of the process. > But this can be questioned ! > > For your comments, if you don't want to change code and make a PR, fill an > issue in Trac so we can comment on it. > > Trac is our main issue tracker so I think that it is better to fill your > projects tickets there too. > > Thanks again, > > Warm regards, > > Nicolas Roelandt > > Le lun. 7 oct. 2019 à 06:57, Felicity Brand <felicitybr...@gmail.com> a écrit > : >> >> Hello all, >> >> I've been working on the Quick Start template and there are a couple >> of questions I wanted to ask. >> >> I have come across the Sphinx markup :guilabel: and :menuselection: >> What do we gain by using these? It seems to me something extra to >> type. I understand we can then render them a particular way, but if >> it's just going to be rendered bold it feels like more effort than >> it's worth. But please let me know if I'm missing something in my >> understanding here. Do we want to continue using this convention? >> >> I'd like some guidance on my process next. >> At a previous meeting, we agreed that the best way for me to give >> feedback would be GitHub comments. I think I need to raise a PR in >> order to be able to comment on the code. But I didn't intend on making >> any changes...so I'm not sure what would go in my PR. Unless I make >> some kind of nominal change that we all agree on beforehand? I suppose >> we'll want a PR per project quick start - so that would be maybe 50 >> PRs. Is that cool with everyone? >> >> My intention was to also create about 50 trac tickets, one for each >> project. These would include the details of my rating score of the >> quick start and perhaps a link to the relevant GitHub PR. I thought it >> would be appropriate to have trac as well as GitHub so that anyone >> could look at the trac ticket and pick up from there. What do folk >> think about that? >> >> I'm not ready to start any GitHub work yet, but I wanted to get >> discussion on this rolling so that I know what to do when that time >> comes. >> >> Thanks >> Felicity >> _______________________________________________ >> osgeolive mailing list >> osgeolive@lists.osgeo.org >> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeolive > > > > -- > Bien cordialement, > > Nicolas Roelandt > mail: roelandtn....@gmail.com > mobile: +33 (0)6 42 40 42 55 > twitter: @RoelandtN42 > > _______________________________________________ > osgeolive mailing list > osgeolive@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeolive > > -- > Cameron Shorter > Technology Demystifier > Open Technologies and Geospatial Consultant > > M +61 (0) 419 142 254 > > _______________________________________________ > osgeolive mailing list > osgeolive@lists.osgeo.org > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeolive _______________________________________________ osgeolive mailing list osgeolive@lists.osgeo.org https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/osgeolive
