|
Do you really want to let a marketing schmuck edit a wiki?
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Give them credit, if a marketing schmuck can run the most powerful tech company in the world into the ground there's no limit to what they can do!
Back on topic, make a shared Google doc and let the drones fight amongst themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, I know this much ~
The final é in finalé is the finalé of finalé.
|
|
|
|
|
At my current work place, we have databases named like below on the same instance of SQL Server
1. Database1
2. Database1 New
3. Database1 Current
4. Database1 Recent
5. Database1 Latest
6. Database1 Real
For some reason, no one wants to delete any of them.
|
|
|
|
|
I make them put their initial after the database version, then I know who the owner is. I'm also in the habit of taking DB off line on the dev and UAT servers, if no one screams in a month I can delete them.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity
RAH
|
|
|
|
|
Almost as bad as putting "new" to indicate that this is a new version.
modified 20-Oct-19 21:02pm.
|
|
|
|
|
We have live servers with new at the front of the name.
I hate to think what we'll have if they need replacing again.
Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them.
|
|
|
|
|
Simple: Newer.
Next update: Newest
Final update: Newester
|
|
|
|
|
What about the updates after the final one? E. g.
New Final
Newer Final
Newest Final
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Reminds me off all those Cher FINAL TOUR! tours.
It was broke, so I fixed it.
|
|
|
|
|
The one with the most recent maintenance date.
|
|
|
|
|
Same here, with 'latest'.
THESE PEOPLE REALLY BOTHER ME!! How can they know what you should do without knowing what you want done?!?!
-- C++ FQA Lite
|
|
|
|
|
The one with the most recent last modified date?
|
|
|
|
|
You'd think.
Except it isn't. You've had merge conflicts before, right? Same deal.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, that sucks then 
|
|
|
|
|
So use a version number before Final in the name to imply it's baselined. Then increment the version number before finalizing and always remove Final while it's a work in progress.
document_1.0.doc
document_1.1.doc
document_2.0_Final.doc
document_2.1.doc
document_2.2.doc
document_2.3.doc
document_3.0_Final.doc
|
|
|
|
|
Nah - makes too much sense! We'll never get management to accept that! 
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
If more than one person will be working on the document simultaneously then source control (like SVN) is the best option.
For documents you are working on that others are not contributing to try the following naming convention. It works for me.
document20140103.docx
document20140131.docx
document20140206.docx
document20140223.docx
document20140316.docx
You will always know the latest and greatest version of the document.
Well at least the latest version. 
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
And if it becomes even more intense one can add the HHmmss 
document20140103_085219.docx
document20140103_090659.docx
document20140103_102534.docx
document20140103_102601.docx
document20140103_103754.docx
document20140103_115910.docx
document20140103_142101.docx
Loading signature...
. . . Please Wait . . .
|
|
|
|
|
I always add a letter to the date, starting with "a", so I don't have to deal with the time.
|
|
|
|
|
Recently while sitting in at the end of a share point configuration provided by a vendor I noticed several copies of an SSRS report in the share. I asked what didn't you enable versioning? The attendees on my side looked perplexed and the "consultant" said, "Yes, I suppose we could have done that.
You just can't win!
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: This is why documents need source control...
You ever try a combo of your code repo and the built-in revisioning tools in Word? Da Link[^]
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
AFAIK that's only meant to compare the most recent (or FINAL?  ) changes. I doubt it can track revisions of revisions.
I remember using such a feature in document reviews some 20 years ago. Of course version control was rudimentary at the time, and nobody ever thought of versioning word documents either, so what we did is maintain version numbers right within the document. At least that kept the confusion concerning names to a minimum. But it had other drawbacks... 
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: AFAIK that's only meant to compare the most recent (or FINAL? ) changes. I doubt it can track revisions of revisions.
I've only used it for that, so you may be right. But using that in comb with source control is better than document naming mangling ya know.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Release your inner demon.
..take a copy of "document - final - DG-comments.docx", copy it once in the directory it's already in, and add the remark "probably the current latest version".
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
