Feature suggestion

[fernando...@gmail.com]

Hi!

Some time ago, I tried a task manager named "Above & Beyond", that had a nice feature: "variable tasks".

For example, you could have a "daily" task named: Clean [Bathroom|Bedroom|Kitchen]

The first time the task appears, it would say "Clean Bathroom".  When you check it as done, the next repetition will appear as "Clean Bedroom", and the next one "Clean Kitchen"... and then repeat itself.

In that way, you can have only one task, with a diferent name each time it repeats.

I think this would be a great addition to MLO.

Greetings and nice week!

--

 

	Fernando Barajas Díaz-Lozano www.nuestroweb.com www.mayasistemas.com fernando...@gmail.com

 

[Alyona (MLO Support)]

Thank you for the nice suggestion. It would be good to know what other users think about it.

[Marius Jacobsen Eggerud]

Great idea! Supported.

[b.ca...@gmail.com]

Would be a good addition! I'd certainly use it.

[MG]

Hi all,

+1 for this feature, mainly because of nowadays life rush, we need to capture everything in an efficient way.

And this suggestion goes in that direction, mainly for short text task entries.

I would use it for sure.

BR.

M.

[Michael Emerald, CFA]

I prefer the existing “subtasks in order” for this implementation.  Though, a suggestion I mentioned before, I’d like MLO to acknowledge a delay EVEN WHEN THERE IS NO EXPLICIT DEPENDENCY.  Your example is perfect to explain why…

 

I clean the bathroom.  Whew! I need a break now!  At least a week before I get to the kitchen!  So I’d like to have:

PARENT: Clean house (subtasks in order)

                Clean bathroom

                Clean bedroom (1 week delay)

                Clean kitchen (1 week delay)

 

Moreover, by NOT having to specify dependencies, I can easily re-arrange to correct the above mistake (I want to do the kitchen after the bathroom) without having to delete then reform dependencies.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mylifeorganiz...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/ba02d976-e018-4138-b75d-0aacd4bf6006%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[TMZ]

Once there was a question how you can get the effect of that feature with the existing MLO - that shows, that it isn't quite simple to do.

And I think, that feature would be used by many users, cause it's a every-day-situation.

+1

[Nick Clark]

I agree with Michael. It’s much more flexible to have separate tasks as you can change other settings on each. It’s hardly any additional typing either.

[b.ca...@gmail.com]

@ Michael & Nick. I'm not sure of your point. If a feature is implemented which you don't like you don't have to use it. Are we counting averaging thumbs up and thumbs down or are we looking to see if there is interest in a suggestion?

On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 12:42:00 AM UTC-5, Fernando Barajas wrote:

[Stéph]

Hello Fernando,

Michael and Nick's point is that the outcome you're looking for can already be achieved with existing MLO functionality. However, your suggestion wouldn't add any complication (in fact it would be quite a neat option, if it can be implemented reasonably easily by the developers) so, although I can't imagine I'd use it, I'd agree that it would be a useful addition for others.

From my experience of being on the beta team, I'd say the decision on which features to develop is based on the level of interest (number of positive responses), but also on how complicated it is to develop. It also depends on whether the suggestion fits with Andrey's vision for direction of the software. So, there isn't really a count of thumbs up and down and there isn't any guarantee of which suggestions will be adopted.

[Ayman Teaman]

I do something similar to what Michael does as well :) 

Your 'variable task' feature reminds me of a feature I suggested on my application to 'beta team', namely "Workflows". 

You can implement a workflow-like setup by using combinations of "do tasks in order" and repeatability, and while it is flexible, but:

1)  It is complex 

2) Doesn't capture all the requirement (e.g. some tasks can be optional, have what-if scenario)

3) Once you go beyond 3-7 tasks in a given project or folder, it starts to get really complex.

Workflows help you create, manage, view a 'set' of tasks. It can be also implemented as a wizard, making it super powerful.

I believe workflows is a 'major' feature, and I can discuss it more if there is interest in it.

If the OP strictly wants simple to create, quick tasks to be done in 'succession', then I agree (i.e. random things that pop in the day, and you just want to quickly organize yourself).

I see tremendous value in implementing this feature.

However, if they are repeatable tasks and things that don't have a sense of urgency, then I believe Michael's approach is the right way to go as it is flexible and already exist :)

On Tuesday, April 3, 2018 at 8:42:00 AM UTC+3, Fernando Barajas wrote:

[Domas]

I think it's always cost & benefits analysis. If it's possible to replicate a specific piece of functionality using current functions, then perhaps it's not worth developing.

As every new feature will cost time & money to developers.

[Fletcher Kauffman]

Oh, if only someone would pay them money for their time.

[Fletcher Kauffman]

I had made a similar request a long time ago, except I wanted for it to return a random task out of a list. Andrey didn't like the idea, so it got canned.

There's a lot of things like this that may not have an obvious use case, but they enable so much more emergent functionality.

Some of these things can be accomplished with the existing application, but they're complex and cumbersome and hard-to-maintain.