Bug 1012226 - Document use of Process: blocks
Summary: Document use of Process: blocks
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: PressGang CCMS
Classification: Community
Component: Documentation
Version: 2.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: lcarlon
QA Contact: Lee Newson
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 1012247 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2013-09-26 03:55 UTC by Misty Stanley-Jones
Modified: 2014-06-18 07:55 UTC (History)
2 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Build Name: 13968, PressGang CCMS Handbook-2.0-1 Build Date: 25-09-2013 16:05:32 Topic ID: 13979-537703 [Latest]
Last Closed: 2014-06-18 07:55:44 UTC

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Description Misty Stanley-Jones 2013-09-26 03:55:34 UTC 
See https://mojo.redhat.com/groups/ecs/blog/2013/09/25/topic-reuse-better-practices (in the comments) for Jared's reference.
Comment 1 Lee Newson 2013-10-09 05:55:42 UTC 
*** Bug 1012247 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 2 Lee Newson 2013-10-09 05:56:56 UTC 
This looks like it was completed, so adding QA notes:

Title: Use the <literal>Process:</literal> Block to Group Tasks in a Sequence

The information about processes is partly incorrect and missing some information. Details:

1. A Process can be used as either a Section, or a Chapter.

2. "Each topic's output will include a link to the previous topic in the process at the top, and a link to the next topic in the process at the bottom" is wrong. It will only included next/previous links to "Task" topics. So if I had the following:

Concept 1
Task 1
Concept 2
Task 2

Concept 2 wouldn't have any previous/next links as a process block is designed to automatically link the steps (identified as task topics) together.

3. No mention is made about the topics having to be a task to have the links injected.
Comment 3 Misty Stanley-Jones 2013-10-09 06:22:21 UTC 
Addressed in revision 544707.
Comment 4 Lee Newson 2013-10-09 06:43:41 UTC 
Looks perfect, thanks Misty.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.