Hi, thanks for your comments. I like the idea of having multiple dependencies display with the status color. Not sure how to map count to colors though. Ideas? Or we could simply add the number, like: "Pending (2)".
The "arrow" displaying successors could very well be used to expand a block which shows dependent tasks. I think this was also requested by Benjamin Fleischer. Artifacts of this unfinished feature can be seen by clicking the arrow. I also like the idea of creating dependencies with drag and drop. Not sure how to make this as unobtrusive as possible. I think the "DRAG" items in Contexts and Projects pages are somewhat inappropriate in the regular views. Can we simply convert the description to a draggable area? /Henrik On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 12:15 AM, Nicholas Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > After a quick look (the prototype demo is nice) one thing I could suggest is > a clearer signal of dependency. Maybe have tasks indent under the task they > are dependant on. For multiple dependancy, have the task appear multiple > times, and change the colour of the status ("Pending") flag. > Might also be nice to be able to drag tasks onto other tasks to create > dependencies. > > Nicholas > On Thu, Jun 4, 2009 at 6:45 AM, Henrik Bohre <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> To make it easier to give feedback, I deployed the demo at >> http://tracks-deps.heroku.com. (Thanks Gavin for the howto). >> >> Please note that this is at the prototype stage, and for now my main >> goal is to integrate it with the Tracks/GTD work flow and GUI look and >> feel, but any feedback is highly appreciated. >> >> Login with tester/tester and have fun with it! >> >> BR >> /Henrik >> >> On Tue, Jun 2, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Henrik Bohre <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Hi all, >> > >> > Progress report: >> > >> > I started a fork on http://wiki.github.com/bohrax/tracks. Perhaps I >> > should have branched the code also? Being a complete newbie to git, >> > Ruby and Rails I'd appreciate any feedback and tips on best practices >> > here. >> > >> > Anyway, the code, while still being in an early stage and practically >> > devoid of error checking now supports the basics for >> > creating/editing/viewing dependencies as described in #300 and #903. >> > >> > If someone would have time to try the code out, or dig into it, it >> > would be really great. Any feedback appreciated! >> > >> > BR >> > /Henrik >> > >> > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 12:01 AM, Tim Madden <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> Hi Henrik, >> >> >> >> I could definitely use this functionality. I do not have time now to >> >> review >> >> your wiki page in detail but in my quick scan it looked spot on. I'd >> >> be >> >> happy to test your branch and give you feedback. Let me know the url >> >> when >> >> there is something there! >> >> Tim >> >> >> >> >> >> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Henrik Bohre <[email protected]> >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Hi Reinier, Eric and others! >> >>> >> >>> One of the reasons I am pushing this now, is that I have more spare >> >>> time to spend on this project up to August than usual. So, my concern >> >>> is to move this forward as much as possible until then. So far, I have >> >>> only received feedback on my wiki page from Reinier, and a comment on >> >>> #300 from Yoichi. I am not sure how much response can be expected? >> >>> >> >>> One way to go, is that I start a branch and begin implementing a >> >>> minimal version of the proposal "as is", and receive your feedback on >> >>> that. Mostly to get a better feel for the work flow and GUI issues. >> >>> >> >>> The help I need in that case would mostly be: testing prototype >> >>> versions, code review and RoR expertise. >> >>> >> >>> The question is (mostly to Reinier): Do you think there are still too >> >>> many unresolved issues? Do you want more consensus before I start >> >>> coding away? >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> BR >> >>> /Henrik >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:24 PM, Eric Allen <[email protected]> >> >>> wrote: >> >>> > This is great news! The background on this is mostly that I was >> >>> > going to >> >>> > take on the project over a year ago, but got bogged down with school >> >>> > and >> >>> > then work and never got around to it. It's been on "the list" for a >> >>> > while, >> >>> > but none of us has been willing to take the plunge. That being said, >> >>> > I'd >> >>> > be >> >>> > happy to help you make this happen! A lot of us want to see some >> >>> > kind of >> >>> > dependency management in Tracks, but the big issue is making it >> >>> > unobtrusive >> >>> > and a positive in light of GTD. >> >>> > >> >>> > -Eric >> >>> > >> >>> > On May 14, 2009, at 3:08 PM, Henrik Bohre wrote: >> >>> > >> >>> >> FYI: I'd like to inform you about some work being done to outline a >> >>> >> proposal for adding dependencies between actions. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> http://www.getontracks.org/wiki/ActionDependencies/ >> >>> >> >> >>> >> I have taken the liberty to use >> >>> >> https://www.assembla.com/spaces/tracks-tickets/tickets/300 for >> >>> >> tracking the progress for this feature, and >> >>> >> https://www.assembla.com/spaces/tracks-tickets/tickets/903 for >> >>> >> tracking a GUI mockup. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> This is the feature I'd most like to see in future versions of >> >>> >> Tracks, >> >>> >> so I urge all interested to hack away at the wiki page and the >> >>> >> above >> >>> >> tickets to create an excellent implementation proposal. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Also, since I am new to the Tracks community I may not have all the >> >>> >> background info about what people have done earlier on this >> >>> >> feature. >> >>> >> So please, let me know if I have missed something. >> >>> >> >> >>> >> >> >>> >> Best regards, >> >>> >> /Henrik >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> >>> >> Tracks-discuss mailing list >> >>> >> [email protected] >> >>> >> http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss >> >>> > >> >>> > _______________________________________________ >> >>> > Tracks-discuss mailing list >> >>> > [email protected] >> >>> > http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss >> >>> > >> >>> _______________________________________________ >> >>> Tracks-discuss mailing list >> >>> [email protected] >> >>> http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss >> >> >> >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> Tracks-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss > > _______________________________________________ Tracks-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss
