Oops... ignore the part that says "0.255102 of a 24 hour day (so a 168 hour week) 42.857136 how much of a 45 hour week?"
It was part of an earlier idea I didn't edit out. On 18 January 2011 14:15, Mary Renaud <[email protected]> wrote: > Okay, this is explained the way someone who does not code would explain it, > so please stick with me. > > Since the software already has access to the due date, lead time, and > estimated time any task will take to complete, I was thinking it might not > be too difficult to create a report to do the following... > > Take the total estimated time (using max estimated is probably best since > it's better to plan for the worst case than the best) and divide it by the > total amount of hours in the lead time to create some kind of "Lead Time > Factor" (or any other more intelligent name). > > E.g.: > task 1 > Estimated max: 300h > Due date: April 3, 11:59PM > Lead time: 98.5h (= 4d, 2h, 30min) > (lead time is decreased as today gets into the lead time... > i.e., if the start date was exactly 24 hours ago, the lead time would > = 74.5 instead of 98.5) > Lead time factor would be: 3.045685 (300/98.5; a number above 1.0 means > it's physically impossible... even without sleep) > > > Have a pop-up window (from the tools menu - perhaps under the heading of > "Workload Report" or something similar) in which you can type how many work > hours you have per day or week (whichever makes the overall coding > easiest... I'm not a coder and may be talking gibberish, so correct for my > lack of knowledge as necessary). > > Let's say it looks something like this, for argument's sake: > " [ ] " means entered by user > "=" means calculated by mlo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > Work hours per week: [ 45.0 ] > View report for next [ 12.0 ] week > Starting: [ Jan 17 ] > {Workweek factor = 45/168 = 0.267857} > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > The software then picks out a day and time that is 12.0 weeks away and > works backwards from there, applying the workload factor to the hours > included in the lead time of each task and spits out totals for each week. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > *WARNING*: Lead time for "*task 1*" too short for 45-hour workweek { <- > this is determined by dividing the estimated hours of the task by the work > hours entered above } > > > Jan 17 - Jan 23 = 0 > Jan 24 - Jan 30 = 0 > Jan 31 - Feb 6 = 0 > Feb 7 - Feb 13 = 0 > Feb 14 - Feb 20 = 0 > Feb 21 - Feb 27 = 0 > Feb 28 - Mar 6 = 0 > Mar 7 - Mar 13 = 0 > Mar 14 - Mar 20 = 0 > Mar 21 - Mar 27 = 0 > *Mar 28 - Apr 3 = 300.00 hours* > Apr 4 - Apr 10 = 0 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Let's say there's also a "task 2" with only slightly different parameters > (a different due date and longer lead time), as well as the same "task 1": > > task 2 > Estimated max: 300h > Due date: April 3, 11:59PM > Lead time: 1176.0h (= 49d) > Lead time factor would be: 0.255102 (300/1176) > > 0.255102 of a 24 hour day (so a 168 hour week) 42.857136 > how much of a 45 hour week? > > > So now the Workload summary (which includes all/both tasks) would look like > this: > > Work hours per week: [ 45.0 ] > View report for next [ 12.0 ] week > Starting: [ Jan 17 ] > {Workweek factor = 45/168 = 0.267857} > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > *WARNING*: Lead time for "*task 1*" too short for 45 hour workweek ( <- > this is determined by dividing the estimated hours of the task by the work > hours entered above ) > > > Jan 17 - Jan 23 = 0 > Jan 24 - Jan 30 = 0 > Jan 31 - Feb 6 = 0 > Feb 7 - Feb 13 = 0 > Feb 14 - Feb 20 = 42.86 {See workload hours calc explanation below} > Feb 21 - Feb 27 = 42.86 > Feb 28 - Mar 6 = 42.86 > Mar 7 - Mar 13 = 42.86 > Mar 14 - Mar 20 = 42.86 > Mar 21 - Mar 27 = 42.86 > *Mar 28 - Apr 3 = 342.86 hours* > Apr 4 - Apr 10 = 0 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Workload hours calc explanation: Sum of [for each task: (Lead time factor > / Workweek factor * work hours = 42.86)] > > > So, now you can scroll down your list of upcoming weeks and see if there > are any in which the workload is above your working hours. (Even better if > the window bolds the font for any week where the total workload hour > work > hours per week.) Then you just have to go to tasks in and around that week's > range and fiddle with the lead times, deadlines, etc. and then come back and > check to see if your workload is good enough to prevent bottlenecks. > > (Note, laid out this way, my idea would require keeping a separate file for > home and work so that home tasks don't count in time for work tasks... > but... SO? I would GLADLY maintain a separate work file in order to balance > my work deadlines.) > > > I can think of other little tweaks that would make this even better but > this is the most bare-bones approach I can come up with that would REALLY > REALLY help boost MLO's time management functionality. > > Did that make sense to ANYONE? > > What do you all think? Would this be enough to cover, at least for now, the > workload issues some people are having? > > Andrey (hope you don't mind me calling you by your first name): Is this as > easy to implement as I suspect or are there complications I haven't thought > of? > > Sorry for the long post... again! :) > Mary > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en.
