Re: [Planner Dev] Proposal for new features: screenshot

[Kurt Maute <kurt maute us>]

On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 10:57 +0100, Matteo Nastasi wrote:

> The idea behind is a little bit different, i would tell to the user
> "how much time is stealed from other (vampire) tasks", not "when 
> resources works at task"; delta = (work made / work expected) where 
> "work expected" is the work of all resources that are
> at work in a particular day (example of yogi and bubu at day 12: bubu
> not work but the totality of the working resources of the task
> "sleeping" (yogi ;) ar working).

ok, I see your logic.  I still don't necessarily agree, but I can live
with it.  ;-)

> > I second Richards opinion that working with shading the bar would be
> > more more clear to the user.
> Sorry, about this point I'm a little stubborn ;) for 2 reasons: 
>   1) old symbols are more understandible then new symbols
> 
>   2) I add 4 new concepts not only "not standard not working day" about
>      working/not working days: 
>      . some resource of a task not work in a working day
>      . all resources of a task not work in a working day
>      . some resource of a task work in a not working day (white band
>        under the task)
>      . all resources of a task work in a not working day (white bands
>        upper and under the task - day 10, task "to steal honey" in the
>        screenshot example).
> 
> With your method I don't understand how:
>   1) sign partial ferial of some resource assigned of a task
>   2) sign work on not working days

Agreed, you'd lose a level of detail unless you got really fancy with
shading the bar or something.  I'm sure we'll get plenty more feedback
and suggestions from the user population after a release.


> Ok, for me not problem about this point, what property I can "copy" for
> implement it, view critical ?.

Yes, that's a good one.

> I'm thinking about this point, currently a task is a vampire if it is on
> fixed date and have priority = 9999. Vampire tasks don't recursive vampirize
> themselves, the target of the feature is add a facility to manage the
> project when it is running not an omnicomprensive fully consistent
> feature, if you use it you must know what are you doing.

Eventually I'd like to see this work for a full range of prioritized
tasks... i.e. resources would float to the highest priority if there are
several competing at different priorities.  This is a great first step
though.

Thanks again.

-- 
Kurt Maute <kurt maute us>