Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Harry Sugden

operations Process for updating documents

Recommended Posts

Harry Sugden

Although my availability is sporadic, when I am about, I would really like to help keep documents up to date. The current process of going through the Helpdesk adds an extra step to documentation updates in my view, and I would love to get started on some necessary changes to the Heathrow EGLL ADC vMATS and Crib Sheet.

So perhaps, a workflow along the lines of this might work?

  • All master documents stored in a read only (Google Drive) folder, than members can download from
  • When updates need doing, and you're willing to make them, post on the appropriate document page to avoid duplication of work
  • When your updates are complete, upload to a pending review (Google Drive) folder - perhaps this script can help, but I'm no expert? - and submit a helpdesk ticket detailing what changes have been made
  • The document can then be reviewed by Operations, or posted on the documents forum for wider review - and hopefully approved!

Any other ideas on how this could be made more seamless? Or make it easier for updates to be made on time?


(Side note - though anyone using the VATSIM UK Document Template I hope will have installed the Alegre Sans font on the Branding Guidelines page!!!! 😄 )

Share this post

Link to post
Adam Turner

Could we have a Github repository solely for documentation issue tracking? Nothing actually in the repo but just use it to track when there are changes required for the documentation. Could also keep track of which changes are higher priority than others. 

Whenever someone in the membership notices that something in the documentation is wrong, direct them to the repo and tell them to open an issue. Then a member of the ops team categorises the issue - is it a small issue that can be bundled for release with other issue, or is it a bigger issue that warrants a documentation revision of its own. If there are less changes to be made on each revision then small changes could hopefully be completed much more quickly. 

Perhaps the process can go: Member wanting to update goes to docs github -> Claims issues for their desired document -> Downloads copy from originals G Drive -> Send to helpdesk document with changes made -> Document reviewed, published and Github issues closed. 

I know this is all very idealistic but I'm definitely happy to get involved! 

Edited by Adam Turner

Share this post

Link to post
Andy Ford
8 hours ago, Adam Turner said:

Could we have a Github repository solely for documentation issue tracking? Nothing actually in the repo but just use it to track when there are changes required for the documentation. Could also keep track of which changes are higher priority than others. 

For simply issue tracking, there are plenty of better solutions than GitHub 🙂 GitHub best combines issues and code (not disagreeing with issue tracking, just that GitHub isn't best suited if that's all you want to achieve) 🙂

Share this post

Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
  • Similar Content

    • Luke Thompson
      By Luke Thompson
      I don't know if it's just me but as an S1 some people book 4 hour slots, which is restricting people who would like to get hours up not as they can take up time I may be free.
      I dont usually book as i never know when I am free now a days with school work, etc...
      So would it be possible to maximise the time people can book as i really think a 4 hours slot is way too long for someone to book for, when someone else could also be getting hours.
      p.s I have a feeling this will get a lot of backlash
    • Callum McLoughlin
      By Callum McLoughlin
      Hi all
      Positive to see the S1 AFIS and A/G suggestion taken forward. Would it possible to now re-evaluate whether restrictions on MAN_CTR can be lifted so a member can log in to this bandboxed position without overlying LON_N_CTR control? I received quite a few messages suggesting this would be an offer taken up by C1s who, like me, hate the area control element of N and instead focus on the terminal control aspects and provide better support to the now fairly frequently online APP controllers (which would be great). We did this during the Manchester Overload event (is it safe to mention that again yet :P) and it was 'operationally' a great success.
      I'd suggest something along the lines of MAN_CTR can be opened whenever, but the W/E split can only be opened when both AC N and MAN is already online.
      When BT pull their finger out and give me some broadband I know I'd log in to MAN. At the moment when I control I tend to go for either GP_APP, CC_APP or LL_APP... MAN_CTR would be somewhat a homecoming and I know for certain you'd see me and (based on the messages I alluded to in a previous paragraph) a few others deciding to head onto there too.
      So what say ye?
    • Alex Ashley
      By Alex Ashley
      I was taking a look through the downloads section this morning, and I was surprised to see how much documentation has been left out of date, or has now been superseded by newer information on the website (e.g. the Gatwick Pilot Brief). While it is indeed true that some documentation won't need updating unless there is a major change (e.g. the METAR decoding guide), having up to date documentation in other areas will help members significantly in my opinion.
      There are several ways this issue could be mitigated, possibly starting with the removal of 'obsolete' documentation which has been superseded by newer documentation, either in the same place or somewhere else on VATSIM UK. In addition to this, the Operations Department could post a list of documentation that is 'outdated' and that needs updating in its section of the forums, inviting members to update it.
      I am sure this will be mutually beneficial for many members. There has been some great work done already with regards to keeping documentation updated and hopefully this could help supplement those systems that are already in place.
    • Michael Benson
      By Michael Benson
      In reference to the opening of EGLL GMC positions as outlined here I was just wondering if the reasoning is purely to mimic real world procedures of if there are other circumstances?  The reason been is that the real world change is done due to the physical layout of the VCR and that it's much easier to see what's going on out of the window during easterly ops from the GMC1 position.  This, obviously, isn't an issue on VATSIM and therefore for the sake of simplicity of controllers and pilots alike I am not sure the change needs to take place.  Similarly if you do an end change does the bloke doing 2_GND then need to log off and move to 1_GND and visa versa?
      If the change is done fair enough, but I thought a little background may put the change into context.
    • Ross Gunn
  • Create New...