Document Plone 3.3 PLIPs when needed

[Israel Saeta Pérez]

I've filed some bugs in Trac on the documentation component regarding Plone 3.3 accepted PLIPs documentation.

AFAIK, neither we (the doc team) nor the framework team have defined a specific workflow to document PLIPs but both seem to agree this is necessary.

-- israel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Plone-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs

[Alexander Limi]

On Thu, 25 Dec 2008 08:29:55 -0800, Israel Saeta Pérez  
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I've filed some bugs in Trac on the documentation component regarding  
> Plone
> 3.3 accepted PLIPs
> documentation

Cool. Do note that it's considered best-practice to put the action as the  
title of the tickets, as these might show up in lots of other contexts  
where it might be unclear that they are documentation tasks, ie. "Document  
PLIP #126" instead of just "PLIP #126".

You already managed to confuse me and Hanno. ;)

Thanks for being pro-active and tracking the documentation parts of this!

--
Alexander Limi · http://limi.net


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Plone-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs

[Israel Saeta Pérez]

On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Israel Saeta Pérez <[hidden email]> wrote:

I've filed some bugs in Trac on the documentation component regarding Plone 3.3 accepted PLIPs documentation.

I've already seen some 3.3 PLIPs implementation announcements in the framework-team mailing list describing what documentation changes would be needed. Should we assign the related documentation tickets to avoid leaving this task undone?

-- israel

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Plone-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs

[Wichert Akkerman]

Previously Israel Saeta Pérez wrote:

> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Israel Saeta Pérez <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
> > I've filed some bugs in Trac on the documentation component regarding
> > Plone 3.3 accepted PLIPs documentation<https://dev.plone.org/plone/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&component=Documentation&milestone=3.3&order=priority>
> > .
> >
>
> I've already seen some 3.3 PLIPs implementation announcements in the
> framework-team mailing list describing what documentation changes would be
> needed. Should we assign the related documentation tickets to avoid leaving
> this task undone?

Is this making any progress?

I'ld suggest to just go ahead and assign tickets to people.

Wichert.

--
Wichert Akkerman <[hidden email]>    It is simple to make things.
http://www.wiggy.net/                   It is hard to make things simple.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Plone-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs

[Israel Saeta Pérez]

On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 1:36 PM, Wichert Akkerman <[hidden email]> wrote:

Previously Israel Saeta Pérez wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 5:29 PM, Israel Saeta Pérez <[hidden email]>wrote:
>
> > I've filed some bugs in Trac on the documentation component regarding

> > Plone 3.3 accepted PLIPs documentation<https://dev.plone.org/plone/query?status=new&status=assigned&status=reopened&component=Documentation&milestone=3.3&order=priority>

> > .
> >
>
> I've already seen some 3.3 PLIPs implementation announcements in the
> framework-team mailing list describing what documentation changes would be
> needed. Should we assign the related documentation tickets to avoid leaving
> this task undone?

Is this making any progress?

I've added some documentation info from the framework-team list messages to each ticket.
 

I'ld suggest to just go ahead and assign tickets to people.

I've already assigned some of them, but I'd prefer our editors to have a look at the tickets and accept the ones belonging to their sections.


-- israel


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by:
SourcForge Community
SourceForge wants to tell your story.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword
_______________________________________________
Plone-docs mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/plone-docs