What requires a HOLD vote on the Parts Tracker

[Chris Dee]

While in Billund we worked on Datheader's HOLD list an came up with this:



The process was working through the list and compare it with the current specs as well as how things are currently handled on the PT. As you can see there is just one point left for discussion.

The rest of Orion list:



is more a "political" thing. How do we handle the parts with the above errors that clearly need a (Needs work) in the description, when the original author has lost interest in the part. If it is on HOLD for more than three months, otherwise you would have to ping the PT admin to add the note to the description. I do not think that a simple comment addresses the above problems properly. Would there be a chance to add a WARNING to the PT that stands somehow between HOLD and Comment?

w.

How do you envisage a WARNING vote affecting the certification status? To override the reviewers existing CERT vote, like a Comment, or should it add another vote letter that nees to be cleared before the part can be released? The latter would be complex to implement but could potentially be rolled into a much-needed Parts Tracker redevelopment.

Alternatively, and much simpler to implement, could it work like a comment but automatically email the PT admin for atttention. In which case merely adding a 'Send comment to admin' checkbox to the review page would be even easier to implement and of more general applicability as it could be used on other vote types (e.g. HOLD votes to request deletions, CERT votes to warn of dependencies).