[theme-reviewers] Trac not synching with Extend?

[Merci Javier]

Hi there. So at this time, for not-approved themes we add synchold to
keyword. For approved themes, syncapproved then?

Thanks.

Mercime


On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 2:52 PM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:

> Otto and I discussed automation briefly earlier today ... not likely to
> happen, but I will let Otto explain the reasons (again).
>
>
> Cais.
>
>
> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:40 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>
>> I would also suggest that, if we have such a workflow in place, it might
>> be entirely possible to *automate* the process, through some sort of script.
>> That's a question for Otto.
>>
>> Chip
>>
>>
>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:39 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>
>>> I think it's worth a trial run. The efficiency losses due to having to
>>> modify each ticket upon Sync will be far outweighed by the efficiency gains
>>> of not having to do the back-and-forth scanning between the Extend Sync
>>> list, and the "Every Theme Under the Sun" Trac report.
>>>
>>> The workflow becomes something like this:
>>>
>>> 1) Open Extend/Admin
>>> 2) Open Trac Report: Tickets to sync
>>> 3) Find Trac ticket in Extend; Mark as Live or Old
>>> 4) Open Trac ticket in new tab, remove modifier, Save, close tab
>>>
>>> Which is much easier than the workflow you've published a couple times.
>>> :)
>>>
>>> Chip
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Edward Caissie <
>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dang ... I forgot about that. Using the method of adding an action or
>>>> process to indicate the Theme *needs* to be sync'd also dictates an
>>>> additional action is required to say the Theme *has been* sync'd.
>>>>
>>>> Given the above, I do not agree with the benefits of this method, now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Cais.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:21 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I would think that the report simply needs to look for the modifier.
>>>>> When the Theme is synched, the modifier is changed, so that the ticket no
>>>>> longer shows up in the list.
>>>>>
>>>>> Chip
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Edward Caissie <
>>>>> edward.caissie at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> That may work, perhaps in conjunction with a report of Themes modified
>>>>>> in the last (arbitrary number) 7 days?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cais
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 3:24 PM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That would work, too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chip
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Otto <otto at ottodestruct.com>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 7:52 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> > REVIEWERS: when you close a ticket as APPROVED, add the following
>>>>>>>> keyword to
>>>>>>>> > the ticket: "syncapproved". That way, we can add a Trac report
>>>>>>>> around this
>>>>>>>> > keyword, and won't have to search for approved Themes that need to
>>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>>> > synced. This way, whomever does the sync can just remove the
>>>>>>>> keyword from
>>>>>>>> > the ticket.
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > (If you want to be extra helpful, for tickets closed as
>>>>>>>> not-approved or
>>>>>>>> > newer-version-uploaded, add this keyword to the ticket:
>>>>>>>> "synchold". But
>>>>>>>> > getting the *approved* Themes synced as quickly as possible is far
>>>>>>>> more
>>>>>>>> > important than syncing *old* (i.e. not-approved or
>>>>>>>> newer-version-uploaded)
>>>>>>>> > tickets.)
>>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>>> > After having helped with the Trac-Extend sync for a few weeks now,
>>>>>>>> I'm
>>>>>>>> > fairly convinced that this method would be more efficient than the
>>>>>>>> current
>>>>>>>> > workflow.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think there's probably a better way than using keywords for this.
>>>>>>>> It's kind of a loose field, not suitable for everything.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> While we're not using them on theme's trac at the moment, there are
>>>>>>>> other fields we can use for this. Priority and severity and
>>>>>>>> component
>>>>>>>> spring to mind. These are just dropdowns with items we can put in
>>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What if I changed the Priority field to have "normal" and
>>>>>>>> "needs-sync"
>>>>>>>> as options? Then reviewers could mark the ticket as in need of
>>>>>>>> syncing
>>>>>>>> when they approve it and such.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Otto
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20110524/2043c02e/attachment-0001.htm>