 | | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) I don't recall the discussion either, but that doesn't change my opinion (...) I think is new system is WAY better. Take a look at part 2598 and you'll see why I think this way. I'd rather have the process be slow and put out quality vice (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
I thought about this issue while I was at work and I've decided to reverse my opinion on the matter. I feel that self-cert is OK as long as the user doing it is responsible and feels comfortable doing it. I probably won't start self-certifying my (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Hi reviewers, I am also not disturbed by self-certification practice. First the practice is mainly from people like Chris Dee and Franklin W. Cain that I have high respect for, because of their past and present monumentuous contribution. Their (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Actually, since the previous time that this was raised, I have refrained from self-certifying, and at that time cancelled all my existing self-certifications. But on several of these files, that is still the last action! I'd like to see an (...) (22 years ago, 12-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Good idea. I don't think this would work as 'just another sort' of the parts list page (URL). I'd rather have a "most in need of attention" page, with the following parameters: 1. Exclude all certified files. 2. Sort the files by date of last (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Yes. (...) I don't think they should be included (as a reviewer). (...) I think so. (...) :-) Jacob (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
Here's a first attempt: (URL). This page excludes Certified! and Held files, and sorts by most-recent-action-date, oldest to newest. It does not take superfile-subfile relations into account. Take a look, and let me know what you think. One down (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
Hello Steve, Looks very good... The easiest solution would be to add an 'Date of first submission' field in the part table. Because this field didn't exists so far the start value should be the date of the last action on a part. Then a parts thats (...) (22 years ago, 13-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Looks good. I dont think the subfile issue is all that important, as I only ever review subfiles when required by a superfile I'm reviewing - the superfile will tell me if the subfiles need certifying anyway, and I can get to them easily from (...) (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) That looks great, Steve, thanks. I really think this will help to maintain author perspective, and help some reviewers to target the oldest files. Chris (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Looks good. Would it be difficult to limit the list to the first 20 or so entries? Jacob (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) Depends - do you want to be able to page to the *next* 20 or so entries? Without paging, it'd be very easy to implement. Steve (22 years ago, 14-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Self-Certification in parts tracker
|
|
(...) I think I would, but just having the choice between only the first 20 entries (default) and all the entries (optional) would be helpful. Jacob (22 years ago, 18-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
