What requires a HOLD vote on the Parts Tracker

[Michael Heidemann]

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.

I do not fully understand this pdf file.
All the lines mention one error and/or warning that DatHeader will give to the user based on the specs. we made.
These errors/warnings are not related to the hold vote on the PT.
For some errors I was asked to mention that it shall be a hold vote. So I added in the error message the word "HOLD".
I will now remove the word "HOLD" on the lines where not a yellow HOLD is mentioned and add the word if in the file is a yellow HOLD.
I use the word "WARNING" instead of "ERROR" if DatHeader is unable to decide if the item is in this contect correct or not. The user has to decide it.
Sadly I have no idea what you have in mind if you write "Remove" in the pdf file. Shall I remove the check for this error?

cu
mikeheide