Greg Troxel wrote: > "Chris Nelson" <[email protected]> writes: > >> Greg Troxel wrote: >>> 2. Task A is composed of tasks B and C. A's estimated time is >>> the total of B's and C's. >>> >>> This makes sense, and I think it would be good to have support for >>> this independent of a gantt plugin. >> >> Yes. I agree. It would be a nice piece of separate functionality >> that a Gantt plugin could require. Shall we call it CompositeTicket >> for the purposes of discussion? > > There is already on the wiki > > http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/SubTickets
Thanks for the reference. > This seems ok, but perhaps overly complicated. I see this being > either very much like a second copy of MasterTickets, or a > modification to MasterTickets to add a new column to the dependency > table to distinguish between blocks and is-part-of. It seems like > almost the same thing mechanically as blocking/blocked-by, with a > property on each dependency saying which kind it is. I don't like the "MasterTickets" name. To me, it implies composition, not serial dependency. As noted elsewhere in this thread, I think we want the Gantt to have an interface or configuration option or something which tells it what field to examine to get each type of dependency information but not enforce a specific plugin as the means to create that information. >... >>> In the requirements, it's not clear to me if the scheduling is >>> supposed to be resource aware or not. ... >> >> That's a good question. As long as it's isolated in a plugin and not >> tangling up the core, I don't know that it's a bad thing that the >> Gantt plugin is resource aware. Or maybe there's a Resource Leveling >> plugin that requires the Gantt plugin. (And a Project Management >> package that bundles TimingAndEstimation, MasterTicket, >> CompositeTicket, Gantt, and Resource.) > > I think it would be the other way around, that Gantt would require > Scheduling, but one could view that as one of Gantt's core jobs. To > me, the whole point is to look at all the data of what needs to be > done and generate a valid schedule. Displaying the schedule is > necessary to understand the data, but isn't the main point. > > Can you explain a use case for Gantt without Scheduling? How would > dates be chosen for drawing? Why would this make any sense? (Not > trying to be difficult - I really do not get it.) Maybe I'm thinking about Pert more than Gantt (which might be useful, too) but if the milestones are fixed in time (because they have due dates) and if the Gantt can just analyze composition and start-to-end dependencies, and estimates, it can work backward from the deadline and show you how the tasks lay out. I see value in that even if I can't change from ALAP to ASAP, level resources, etc., etc. >... --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Users" 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/trac-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
