Re[6]: Idea: Dependencies between Tasks

On 04 Jul 2002 21:46:51 +0200 Mikael Hallendal <[email protected]> wrote:

MH> If the result is lots of tasks you don't need to show your
MH> managers/developers you can fold the summary tasks. That way you will
MH> only show the long summary task.

This is obviously an option, although to simplify the entering of such
tasks it would be nice to be able to create 'templates' which allows to
enter task and subtasks in one go.

MH> Another thing that might be nice is to be able to assign "Joe" to the
MH> summary task which would mean that he is assigned to all sub tasks.

This would be helpful indeed. Being able to enter most of parameters at
summary task level and then change only the ones in the subtasks which need
to be different would make things a lot easier, IMHO.

MH> Having events doesn't make it less information, you would still have to
MH> enter information about the events, type:
MH> "API design finished" -- Event
MH> instead of 
MH> "Design API" -- Sub task

To a given extent you are right. However, I thought that this would
simplify the management of the dependency network. Instead of having
different types of dependencies, e.g. beg-end, end-end, slacks, durations
etc. (which I find confusing at times), one would have to deal with a
single type, i.e. the fact that there is a dependency between two points in
the 'task-time' space. The 'type' of the dependency would be given by the
types of events connected, e.g. a beg-end dependency would be given by
connecting the 'task started' event of a task and the 'task completed'
event of the predecessor.
May be one could take such a view in the backstage of dependency treatment,
i.e. by transforming the task/subtask view into an event view when
procssing dependencies, without showing it to the user.
I may be mistaken that this would simplify the treatement of dependencies,
but you guys are the experts :o)

Ciao

-- 
Michele Ravani                  [email protected]
"Those who live hoping, die singing" My Gran