On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 4:44 PM, Jan Kundrát <jkt@g.o> wrote:
> Camille Huot wrote:
>>
>> As a workaround, I would suggest to bump the date when an old document
>> has been checked, tested and certified with current material.
>
> If I were yoswink, I'd kill you for such a change.
OMG they killed Cam !!
And, to be on-topic: I'd rather keep the current system. Using a
"touch" way is imo pointless and more prone to issues (for instance,
fix a language typo on an outdated document shouldn't bump the date
nor version as the document is still outdated).
Removing the date will silence people who say documents are outdated
(when they are not) but will probably create voices that would like to
see a "last modified" date.
In my opinion, documents should always have a "last modified" date. If
you want some sort of document lifecycle, you might want to introduce
a revision period (for instance, every vital doc should be revised
every 3 months, every other doc every year) and add in two headers:
"last revision" and "next revision date"...
Or something completely different :-)
Wkr,
Sven Vermeulen
|
