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.
I don't see much need to use a version control system with FrameMaker files.
Simply storing all Frame files on a server, and insisting everyone work from
the server, keeps two people from modifying the same file at once. This
setup lets everyone work on different chapters, while preventing overlapping
edits in the same file. It let us get our work done really fast at this one
company where I worked, where project timelines were short.
I'm not clear on why folks are concerned with saving every little historic
modification that was ever made to a book file. It's not like this is code.
It's not crucial to product operation; it's just phrasing.
In my experience, weekly backups -- and archiving each version of a book
that's gone to print -- are plenty of version control.
~Beth
bethkane -at- tcisolutions -dot- com
-----Original Message-----
Behalf Of Laura
Tarwater
I've looked in the archives and found nothing regarding my situation in
particular:
I just started working in a development environment with FM books,
using Microsoft's Visual Source Safe as a document control mechanism
(inherited from the programmers). With this setup, it seems that only
one person can have a book checked out at one time. This has been
causing some workflow problems, as you might imagine.
Is there a way with this current setup that will allow different people
to check out different chapters of the same book at the same time? Our
graphics imported by reference especially don't seem to like this.
Is there an alternative setup that would serve better?