I love this idea as well. Doubly so if the automated tests could be well known and sled performed by hosts before upload. On Jul 5, 2020 16:15, "Thaj A. Sara" wrote:I am 100% for this.
Jul 5, 2020 7:04:19 AM Ken Fallon :
> Hi All,
>
> Most of the shows we process require us to make some l
I am 100% for this.
Jul 5, 2020 7:04:19 AM Ken Fallon :
> Hi All,
>
> Most of the shows we process require us to make some level of
> modifications to get them posted. This ranges from fixing tags to a
> complete rewrite of the shownotes, or verifying whether intros were
> actually added or not.
I'm down with that as well. The more info, the better, that way we can
improve it for HPR as a whole.
On Sun, Jul 5, 2020 at 7:03 AM Ken Fallon wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Most of the shows we process require us to make some level of
> modifications to get them posted. This ranges from fixing tags to a
I like the idea a lot. Having a list of things that didn't go smoothly
means I can make targeted process improvements for the next submission.
___
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicrad
If it makes your life easier, I think it's a brilliant idea.
On Sun, Jul 5, 2020, 7:09 AM Andrew Conway wrote:
> Yes, that error feedback seems like a good idea.
>
> Andrew
> ___
> Hpr mailing list
> Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
> http://hackerpublicradio
Yes, that error feedback seems like a good idea.
Andrew
___
Hpr mailing list
Hpr@hackerpublicradio.org
http://hackerpublicradio.org/mailman/listinfo/hpr_hackerpublicradio.org
Hi All,
Most of the shows we process require us to make some level of
modifications to get them posted. This ranges from fixing tags to a
complete rewrite of the shownotes, or verifying whether intros were
actually added or not.
Each modification that we make means that it requires more human
int
