Re: Whimsy templated resolution support

[Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>]

adding back in board-chat as I am going to suggest changing how
officers and members add items to an agenda.

On Mon, Apr 16, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Phil Steitz <ph...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> My only other feedback when I first looked at it was "add item" was
> not obviously all of the possible things to add; but when I think
> about it now it makes sense.  As we add more capabilities like this,
> though, we should think more about how to effectively train PMC
> chairs to know what they can do / how to do it or continue to
> innovate the UI so that it is really obvious.  One could argue that
> most of it is obvious now.

As a follow up - I'd like to move towards deprecating people adding
items directly in SVN.

The root problem here is that the agenda is a loosely structured text
file and contains data that various tools wish to parse.

In the June agenda, there are already two items that are incorrectly
indented (but caught by the whimsy board agenda tool) and a third item
which was added but doesn't show up in the agenda at all (an
out-of-cycle incubator report - missing things like a shepherd and
even a proper attachment number.

As to your comment, I'm not always the best judge as to what is
obvious.  If we get more people to use these functions, questions
undoubtedly will come up, and resolving those questions often leads to
changes in the UI.

- Sam Ruby

P.S.  posting and editing reports, and doing things adding comments or
approvals generally don't cause problems, so I don't see a need to
discourage people doing these things directly in SVN.  It is just
adding new items that has been consistently problematic.