Jonathan,
> I think that the difficulty in updating the document is not that we have
> inconvenient software for doing and facilitating it. It is the intellectual
> difficulty of working out what the changes should be that makes the process
> slow. When we have agreed a ticket, enacting it in the doc should be simple.
> That is happpening slowly now, I presume, because of lack of person-time to
> do it, rather than that the software is awkward.
If we were using github right now, I would fork the CF repository
(make a copy of the document on my own github account), add the text
associated with the ticket I submitted that was approved two years ago
(
http://kitt.llnl.gov/trac/ticket/93) and then submit a pull request.
> if volunteers could do it (as Mark Hedley suggested quite a while ago) but
> there would still be the need for quality-control - someone would have to
> take responsibility for checking that the change was as agreed.
The people with authority to make changes to the official document
(maybe this would still just be Jeff Painter, but could be expanded to
include some other qualified/approved folks) could take a look at the
document *with changes already made* and if the change was as agreed
(really did address a specific issue/ticket), they could just click a
button and it would get merged into the official draft CF 1.7
document.
And if it doesn't look good, a dialog can take place about what needs
to be changed, and the pull request can be modified by the submitter
until it's ready to go. And again, the committer just needs to click
a button to merge.
I think not only helps spread the workload, but also helps the
community feel more engaged in the process.
Thanks,
Rich
--
Dr. Richard P. Signell (508) 457-2229
USGS, 384 Woods Hole Rd.
Woods Hole, MA 02543-1598
Received on Wed Sep 24 2014 - 08:45:44 BST
