workflow (was Progress report)

[Karsten Wade]

On Tue, 2004-10-19 at 11:06, Tammy Fox wrote:

[snipped process]

> Thanks for writing this out Karsten. Yes, I meant that I think there
> should be 2 phases after the edit phase -- one in which the publication
> editor reviews it and once in which the web maintainer publishes it
> after publication editor handoff. Perhaps we need another tracker bug? I
> hate to add even more process into the mix, but it would make it easier
> for me to remember which tutorials need my edits and which just need to
> be pushed live (other than the post-it note on my LCD). Right now, there
> seems to be one tracker bug with the label "Docs ready for going to
> fedora.redhat.com. " To me, the label implies they have past the
> publication editor phase. So, we either need to add another tracker or
> change the summary of the tracker bug to be more inline with its
> purpose.

Actually, that sounds like it's just part of the Editing phase.  The
approach would be:

1. New doc gets new individual tracking #, blocking the active bug
tracker

2. Writer is assigned to that bug.

3. Writer assigns that bug to the Editor for editing.  If the Editor
needs to kick it back to the Writer, reassign it back.  Otherwise, the
Editor assigns it to the Publications Editor (or Editor-in-Chief or
whatever we call that role).

4. Pub Editor does the final-final check.  If it's sent back, it stays
blocking the same bug, but gets individually reassigned to the Editor
(or Writer).  If it's approved, it gets assigned to the Web Maintainer
-and- moved to block the ready-for-publication bug.

How's that?

I need a swim diagram for this stuff. :)

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten Wade, RHCE, Tech Writer
a lemon is just a melon in disguise
http://people.redhat.com/kwade/
gpg fingerprint: 2680 DBFD D968 3141 0115  5F1B D992 0E06 AD0E 0C41