TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Re: Bug tracking systems as information repositories
Subject:Re: Bug tracking systems as information repositories From:Kimber Miller <kimber_miller -at- acs-inc -dot- com> To:techwr-l Date:Tue, 18 Jul 2000 13:14:35 -0500
I can see the benefit to using this kind of system, especially
interesting is the "perception" factor.
How do you decide what constitutes a documentation "bug"?
How do you decide who enters these bugs?
Is bug identification limited to whomever is doing the documetation QA,
or anyone doing a literary or technical review?
Dallas, TX USA
"Fagerlund, Kippi" wrote:
> The pubs group I manage uses both bug tracking
> and source control programs, along with the rest of
> Engineering. These tools include VSS and StarTeam, and
> ClearQuest and ClearCase.
> One reason I like using bug tracking for documentation
> is that it reinforces the perception that we are part
> of Engineering, and therefore use the same tools (and
> presumably are held to some of the same standards) as
> development and QA. It's also a way to keep things
> from falling through the cracks.