Re: Release 8.0

[Thorsten Jolitz <tjolitz@gmail.com>]

John Hendy <jw.hendy@gmail.com> writes:

>>> No.  Someone needs to carefully check he can exports his local clone
>>> of worg.git with the new exporter, fix the wrong syntax, then commit
>>> it.  This surely deserves a public branch of Worg, which people can
>>> hack together.

>> We need a volunteer who is willing to coordinate the conversion
>> of Worg to the new exporter.  This is an important task.  Dogfooding
>> Worg to the new exporter will be a good way to find remaining bugs
>> in the parser/exporter setup.
>>
>> This task would entail:

[...]

>> 3. Organizing contributors who will look at one page after the other
>>    and implementing any changes needed to make the page export (not yet
>>    publish) cleanly with the new exporter.  In this way we need to walk
>>    through all Worg files, and someone needs to keep the tabs on this.
>
> Not sure we totally need to organize this. I'm wondering about
> something like an "editor" property in the file from #2. Contributors
> could self-assign by adding their name to that property in the tracker
> file and then push. Perhaps an agenda view or simply column view could
> quickly show who is assigned to what file?

>> Any takers?

I don't know if this would put a huge work load on somebody who
contributed *much* content to Worg, but otherwise I would propose for
this step that all authors of Worg articles/pages take care of their own
pages. In my case that would be e.g. half a dozen of pages, not that
much of a problem.

Once most Worg authors have fixed their own pages, another round of
fixing the (few?) remaining pages by some volunteers could be started.

Just my 2cents

-- 
cheers,
Thorsten