Sticker dimension errors

[Chris Dee]

In the final stages of putting together the 2011-01 Parts Update, I mistakenly transposed the dimensions of some of the sticker parts, using "Sticker X-dimension x Z-dimension ...", instead of putting the Z-dimension first.

I'd like to correct these, but does anyone feel they need to be cycled through the Parts Tracker to do this?

[Tim Gould]

No. In fact I'd go further and say that, as PT Admin, you should be able to fix any header info you please.

Tim

[Steffen]

from my perspective: no, this would just clutter the PT.

Doing the retitling systematically as a bunch will be less error-prone
than submitting all the files to the PT. Doing that will mean that each
and every file will have to be treated individually.

On the other hand, we could create a good overview page like this
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptreviewsum...instickers
for them.

Chris, can we do something on the PT that will make the "hidden" Admin retitlings show
in the file history? This file
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...s/3651.dat
currently is confusing me a little because its file contents currently does not match
what I uploaded and what is described in the changelog history of the PT.

Would there be a (automatically generated) history entry, things would be more transparent.

[Chris Dee]

Chris, can we do something on the PT that will make the "hidden" Admin retitlings show
in the file history? This file
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg...s/3651.dat
currently is confusing me a little because its file contents currently does not match
what I uploaded and what is described in the changelog history of the PT.

Would there be a (automatically generated) history entry, things would be more transparent.

Yes, that's possible.

Do you mean in the Activity Log, or the File reviews and updates: section on the detail page, or both?

I'd prefer to keep the information light (i.e. "An admin edited the header"), rather then trying to show what was changed.

[Chris Dee]

from my perspective: no, this would just clutter the PT.

Doing the retitling systematically as a bunch will be less error-prone
than submitting all the files to the PT. Doing that will mean that each
and every file will have to be treated individually.

On the other hand, we could create a good overview page like this
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptreviewsum...instickers
for them.

I'd prefer they went through the Parts Tracker so that they get processed properly for a Parts Update (i.e. they get a new "Official Update YYYY-RR" !HISTORY line, but I could pre-Certify them with dummy reviewer votes, then nobody else needs to take action.

[Steffen]

that's sufficient. I only was confused about things happening behind our backs on the server.
just a single history line in both the activity log and the history of the individual file should be sufficient.
thanks a lot.

[Steffen]

I'm of course also happy with cycling them through the PT,
just wanted to save you work. If you submit them as a bunch
and create a review summary page for them, we can systematically CERT them.

[Chris Dee]

that's sufficient. I only was confused about things happening behind our backs on the server.
just a single history line in both the activity log and the history of the individual file should be sufficient.
thanks a lot.

After the usual challenges of inherited spaghetti code, half-implemented changes and a few dead ends, this functionality has now been added to the Parts Tracker.

[Steffen]

thank you very much!
(I know of that spaghetti problem.....)

I think one of the Admin editing scripts introduces stray lines into the files,
you might want to have a look:
http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptdetail.cg.../83396.dat

[Chris Dee]

I'm working on adding a "supercertify" action on the Parts Tracker to allow me to fully certify parts with header only changes, so if you see some "supercert" actions and phantom reviews by PTadmin1 / PTadmin2, that's what its about.