Recommended workflow for checking off items, AutoArchive confusion
172 views
Skip to first unread message
Rob
Nov 11, 2011, 9:45:15 PM11/11/11
to MyLifeOrganized
I've started trying out the desktop version of MLO and it looks like
there are a lot of different ways to handle completed items:
1. Delete items instead of checking them off
2. Check off items, and keep the "hide completed tasks" checkbox
checked
3. Check off items, and occasionally review and delete the checked off
items
4. Check off items, and set AutoArchive to do something with old items
4.1. Set AutoArchive to copy completed tasks to another file (but
leave them in the main file)
4.2. Set AutoArchive to move completed tasks to another file (i.e.,
copy to other file and delete from main file)
4.3. Set AutoArchive to delete completed tasks permanently (without
copying them to another file)
On top of this, there are a bunch of options to configure when
AutoArchive runs. It seems almost as ill-conceived as MS Outlook's
AutoArchive feature, and it's so bloated with options I'm having a
hard time figuring out whether I should even trust it to do the right
thing. It seems like there should just be a button to "clean up
completed items" instead. I appreciate the capabilities of MLO, but
frankly, it blows my mind that I have to ask basic questions like this
in the first place. I would highly recommend that the developers come
up with a single straightforward "correct" solution and banish
AutoArchive and all its complexity to the dark realm from whence it
came.
What does everyone else do with their completed tasks?
Are there any gotchas that I should be aware of before adopting your
workflow?
Bonus points: do I need to be worried about my recurring tasks or
their subtasks being removed by AutoArchive? Do I have to set the
advanced task properties to ensure that recurring tasks and their
subtasks don't get deleted?
there are a lot of different ways to handle completed items:
1. Delete items instead of checking them off
2. Check off items, and keep the "hide completed tasks" checkbox
checked
3. Check off items, and occasionally review and delete the checked off
items
4. Check off items, and set AutoArchive to do something with old items
4.1. Set AutoArchive to copy completed tasks to another file (but
leave them in the main file)
4.2. Set AutoArchive to move completed tasks to another file (i.e.,
copy to other file and delete from main file)
4.3. Set AutoArchive to delete completed tasks permanently (without
copying them to another file)
On top of this, there are a bunch of options to configure when
AutoArchive runs. It seems almost as ill-conceived as MS Outlook's
AutoArchive feature, and it's so bloated with options I'm having a
hard time figuring out whether I should even trust it to do the right
thing. It seems like there should just be a button to "clean up
completed items" instead. I appreciate the capabilities of MLO, but
frankly, it blows my mind that I have to ask basic questions like this
in the first place. I would highly recommend that the developers come
up with a single straightforward "correct" solution and banish
AutoArchive and all its complexity to the dark realm from whence it
came.
What does everyone else do with their completed tasks?
Are there any gotchas that I should be aware of before adopting your
workflow?
Bonus points: do I need to be worried about my recurring tasks or
their subtasks being removed by AutoArchive? Do I have to set the
advanced task properties to ensure that recurring tasks and their
subtasks don't get deleted?
Lisa Stroyan
Nov 12, 2011, 9:31:24 AM11/12/11
to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com
On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 7:45 PM, Rob <rcz...@gmail.com> wrote:
I've started trying out the desktop version of MLO and it looks like
there are a lot of different ways to handle completed items.
I've never used, seen, or been bothered by Auto Archive. Yet I see people on the forum talking about using it quite frequently so I'm sure there are people that appreciate it.
Rob, you seem like a nice, and very intelligent, guy, and so your message has me confused, so at the risk of pissing you off, I'm going to push back a little. Hopefully I've developed enough credibility with you that you will humor me.
I see myself as kind and intelligent, too :) I KNOW that the developer is both because of my interactions with him. And this list has some amazing people on it; overall (and I have a lot of experience with email groups) quite a sharp group and willing to help out others.
Why do you assume that something you don't want is bloat but lack of something you want is a major design flaw? I might never use a review feature, I might think it's way overkill for what I want to do. Perhaps I could be perfectly happy with making my own "REVIEW" context and setting it / unsetting it on tasks as I review them. But I support you wanting that feature, for your process...If I came in and called that feature names, I would be told, "just don't use it".
Perhaps at some point in the past, someone really needed an auto-archive feature and asked for it, and the developers responded, and gave them that option. I'm not saying you should use Auto-archive, or even that it's a key feature of MLO. But perhaps you might want to ask people what they use it for and why it's designed that way, before you suggest that it's horrible? Look at the following paragraph, can you not see how insulting that is to all of us here and to the developers?? It blows your mind that you need to ask basic questions like this? Really?
it's so bloated with options I'm having a
hard time figuring out whether I should even trust it to do the right
thing. It seems like there should just be a button to "clean up
completed items" instead. I appreciate the capabilities of MLO, but
frankly, it blows my mind that I have to ask basic questions like this
in the first place. I would highly recommend that the developers come
up with a single straightforward "correct" solution and banish
AutoArchive and all its complexity to the dark realm from whence it
came.
I'm sorry that you somehow got such a bad view of MLO and somehow think everyone on this list is blind to it's faults. But everyone is entitled to an opinion, and everyone here is also entitled to respect. I honestly do respect you and believe your newcomers perspective adds a lot to the discussion...I hope you can reciprocate long enough to decide if MLO is the right product for your needs.
I'll let someone else take the time to answer your other questions. Thanks for listening.
www.empathic-parenting.com
Rob
Nov 12, 2011, 5:49:01 PM11/12/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Sorry, my little rant was not intended to offend anyone, but to point
out that the AutoArchive feature is too confusing. I'm not saying MLO
is not a good product, either. Out of probably more than two dozen
self-proclaimed GTD apps that I looked at, MLO is the one that
supports the most GTD use-cases while having to resort to the fewest
crazy workarounds. The reason for my venting is that getting rid of
old, completed tasks seems like something that should be very
straightforward, but after stumbling on the AutoArchive feature, I
discovered that it's not.
I appreciate your support regarding the Review feature, but there is a
difference between that (or any other feature I've used to-date) and
AutoArchive. With the Review feature, it's easy for you to decide
whether or not you want to use it. But with AutoArchvie, it's not
clear at all--in my case, it seems like AutoArchive would serve a
basic need, but at the same time it could do something to completely
screw up my file if I don't properly configure everything from the
start.
The aspect that blows my mind is that some things which should be
simple and obvious just aren't. For example, if an app touts itself
first and foremost as a GTD tool (which MLO does very prominently on
its website), it should have certain features and they should function
a certain way. Or, at the very least, there should be a start-to-
finish guide on how to improvise a GTD-style inbox, for example. You
and others helped me clear up my inbox confusion (and I greatly
appreciate the help), but all that confusion could have been avoided
in the first place. The "Case Studies" section of the website consists
of a single, coarsely-defined 5-step HowTo for GTD. Out of all the
links to more information on setting up MLO for use with GTD, most are
broken or don't actually provide much information. The "GTD practices,
guidelines, examples" link points to a Google Groups thread with 13
posts which seem to be a rehash of things that are in the user manual
or feature list. It's also a little weird that MLO relies on fans of
the product to set up most of the infrastructure for user feedback.
It's admirable that MLO has so many loyal followers, but in a way the
followers are actually doing the leading. The problem with this is
that the fan-hosted websites disappear over time and links on the main
MLO website go stale.
Getting back on topic...now I can't figure out the most appropriate
way to deal with completed tasks. I could just leave them, but my
outline will become far too unwieldy whenever I need to uncheck the
"hide completed tasks" box. Deleting the completed tasks one at a time
myself seems like a lot of work that shouldn't be necessary, but the
alternative--using AutoArchive--is incredibly confusing because of all
the options. The documentation does not explain any of the options,
and the few posts I could find on the Google group suggest that only
the developers know exactly how the feature and all its options work.
It's like getting a Swiss Army knife that you have to put together
yourself, when all you want to do is slice an apple. But if you screw
up putting it together, the screwdriver is either going to pop loose
and poke your eye out, or the blade is going to close on your hand
when you try to use it.
I think AutoArchive was probably originally added with good
intentions, but now it has had one band-aid after another slapped on
in an attempt to fix some original design issues. Maybe what follows
should be a separate thread, but I think helps to explain my
confusion. Let me run down the list of options:
- Run AutoArchive every [number] days. The default is 10. Is there a
reason why I wouldn't want it to run every day? Or was this feature
just copied from Outlook without really considering whether the whole
AutoArchive paradigm was the right idea for the job?
- Prompt before AutoArchive runs. The fact that this option exists at
all implies that AutoArchive might do something that I really don't
want it to do. I have my suspicions that this option was also copied
from Outlook, but again, is Outlook-style AutoArchive really the most
appropriate solution? How am I supposed to know whether it's actually
safe to run AutoArchive or not when the prompt comes up? How do I even
know if I will make the right decision? If I keep postponing
AutoArchive because I'm unsure of what to do, I might as well disable
it...but that means I'll have to delete old tasks manually myself.
- Clean out tasks completed more than [number of days/weeks/months]
ago. Fairly self-explanatory, but how long should I let old tasks pile
up? How short a period is too short? What, exactly, does it clean out?
If I have a recurring task with subtasks that takes me a long time to
complete, will the subtasks be removed?
- Clean out completed tasks only with all subtasks completed. That's a
mouthful! Yet it's still probably not completely accurate. I would
assume completed tasks with no subtasks would also be removed, but I
have no way of knowing for certain without experimenting.
- Copy old tasks to archive/Remove old tasks after copy (i.e. move to
selected archive). I can understand why some people might want to keep
their tasks and why others might want to move them, but there is no
reason for AutoArchive to include a "copy to archive but also keep in
main file" option because the Backup feature would accomplish the same
thing (and do a better job of it). But because the option is there,
I'm left to wonder if I should be using it for some reason unknown to
me.
- Permanently delete old tasks. AutoArchive implies that tasks will be
kept somewhere. Delete is the opposite of keep. If I had enabled the
Delete option a long time ago but now decide I don't want it, I might
not think to look in the AutoArchive settings.
- Do not archive tasks in this branch. Right-click a task or folder,
open the Advanced menu, click Properties... then click the AutoArchive
task. That's where this checkbox is buried, about as far away from the
AutoArchive settings as possible. It's one of only two items buried in
this dialog, and is the only item in the Advanced Task Properties
dialog that isn't viewable and reachable from the normal Properties
pane.
How I would fix all this confusion:
1. Document all the options and explain when you would use each one
and what unintended side-effects it might have. If all imaginable
potential side-effects have been considered and been rendered
impossible, document those and explain that they have been accounted
for.
2. Rename "AutoArchive" to "Clean up completed tasks" and add a "Clean
up completed tasks" button to the main screen. This will put control
back in the users' hands, and we will be able to clean up completed
tasks when we know it's safe--such as right after a review.
3. Rename "Run AutoArchive every [number] days" to "Clean up completed
tasks every [number] days" and move the option to the bottom of the
"Clean up completed tasks" options (formerly AutoArchive options), for
people who want the auto-cleanup feature.
4. Remove the "Prompt before AutoArchive runs" checkbox. The "Clean up
completed tasks" button in the main screen eliminates the need for
this option.
5. Rename "Clean out completed tasks only with all subtasks completed"
to "Skip tasks with incomplete subtasks."
6. Replace "Copy old tasks to archive/Remove old tasks after copy"
compound option with a single "Move completed tasks to archive"
option. As I mentioned earlier, the "copy to archive and keep in main
file" option is equivalent to disabling the Clean up (formerly
AutoArchive) feature and enabling the Backup feature.
7. Move the "Do not archive tasks in this branch" checkbox from the
Advanced Task Properties dialog to the Properties page and rename it
to "Do not clean up this branch."
8. Bonus points: show the list of "Do not clean up" branches in the
"Clean up completed tasks" settings (formerly AutoArchive settings).
If even just the first two changes were made, I don't think I ever
would have had any question about what I should do with my completed
tasks.
Again, sorry for coming off so crabby. That part of my original post
was only intended to convey my confusion and frustration in trying to
answer what (to me) seemed like a basic and inevitable question that
should have a simple answer...yet I still remain clueless about what I
should be doing with my completed tasks.
out that the AutoArchive feature is too confusing. I'm not saying MLO
is not a good product, either. Out of probably more than two dozen
self-proclaimed GTD apps that I looked at, MLO is the one that
supports the most GTD use-cases while having to resort to the fewest
crazy workarounds. The reason for my venting is that getting rid of
old, completed tasks seems like something that should be very
straightforward, but after stumbling on the AutoArchive feature, I
discovered that it's not.
I appreciate your support regarding the Review feature, but there is a
difference between that (or any other feature I've used to-date) and
AutoArchive. With the Review feature, it's easy for you to decide
whether or not you want to use it. But with AutoArchvie, it's not
clear at all--in my case, it seems like AutoArchive would serve a
basic need, but at the same time it could do something to completely
screw up my file if I don't properly configure everything from the
start.
The aspect that blows my mind is that some things which should be
simple and obvious just aren't. For example, if an app touts itself
first and foremost as a GTD tool (which MLO does very prominently on
its website), it should have certain features and they should function
a certain way. Or, at the very least, there should be a start-to-
finish guide on how to improvise a GTD-style inbox, for example. You
and others helped me clear up my inbox confusion (and I greatly
appreciate the help), but all that confusion could have been avoided
in the first place. The "Case Studies" section of the website consists
of a single, coarsely-defined 5-step HowTo for GTD. Out of all the
links to more information on setting up MLO for use with GTD, most are
broken or don't actually provide much information. The "GTD practices,
guidelines, examples" link points to a Google Groups thread with 13
posts which seem to be a rehash of things that are in the user manual
or feature list. It's also a little weird that MLO relies on fans of
the product to set up most of the infrastructure for user feedback.
It's admirable that MLO has so many loyal followers, but in a way the
followers are actually doing the leading. The problem with this is
that the fan-hosted websites disappear over time and links on the main
MLO website go stale.
Getting back on topic...now I can't figure out the most appropriate
way to deal with completed tasks. I could just leave them, but my
outline will become far too unwieldy whenever I need to uncheck the
"hide completed tasks" box. Deleting the completed tasks one at a time
myself seems like a lot of work that shouldn't be necessary, but the
alternative--using AutoArchive--is incredibly confusing because of all
the options. The documentation does not explain any of the options,
and the few posts I could find on the Google group suggest that only
the developers know exactly how the feature and all its options work.
It's like getting a Swiss Army knife that you have to put together
yourself, when all you want to do is slice an apple. But if you screw
up putting it together, the screwdriver is either going to pop loose
and poke your eye out, or the blade is going to close on your hand
when you try to use it.
I think AutoArchive was probably originally added with good
intentions, but now it has had one band-aid after another slapped on
in an attempt to fix some original design issues. Maybe what follows
should be a separate thread, but I think helps to explain my
confusion. Let me run down the list of options:
- Run AutoArchive every [number] days. The default is 10. Is there a
reason why I wouldn't want it to run every day? Or was this feature
just copied from Outlook without really considering whether the whole
AutoArchive paradigm was the right idea for the job?
- Prompt before AutoArchive runs. The fact that this option exists at
all implies that AutoArchive might do something that I really don't
want it to do. I have my suspicions that this option was also copied
from Outlook, but again, is Outlook-style AutoArchive really the most
appropriate solution? How am I supposed to know whether it's actually
safe to run AutoArchive or not when the prompt comes up? How do I even
know if I will make the right decision? If I keep postponing
AutoArchive because I'm unsure of what to do, I might as well disable
it...but that means I'll have to delete old tasks manually myself.
- Clean out tasks completed more than [number of days/weeks/months]
ago. Fairly self-explanatory, but how long should I let old tasks pile
up? How short a period is too short? What, exactly, does it clean out?
If I have a recurring task with subtasks that takes me a long time to
complete, will the subtasks be removed?
- Clean out completed tasks only with all subtasks completed. That's a
mouthful! Yet it's still probably not completely accurate. I would
assume completed tasks with no subtasks would also be removed, but I
have no way of knowing for certain without experimenting.
- Copy old tasks to archive/Remove old tasks after copy (i.e. move to
selected archive). I can understand why some people might want to keep
their tasks and why others might want to move them, but there is no
reason for AutoArchive to include a "copy to archive but also keep in
main file" option because the Backup feature would accomplish the same
thing (and do a better job of it). But because the option is there,
I'm left to wonder if I should be using it for some reason unknown to
me.
- Permanently delete old tasks. AutoArchive implies that tasks will be
kept somewhere. Delete is the opposite of keep. If I had enabled the
Delete option a long time ago but now decide I don't want it, I might
not think to look in the AutoArchive settings.
- Do not archive tasks in this branch. Right-click a task or folder,
open the Advanced menu, click Properties... then click the AutoArchive
task. That's where this checkbox is buried, about as far away from the
AutoArchive settings as possible. It's one of only two items buried in
this dialog, and is the only item in the Advanced Task Properties
dialog that isn't viewable and reachable from the normal Properties
pane.
How I would fix all this confusion:
1. Document all the options and explain when you would use each one
and what unintended side-effects it might have. If all imaginable
potential side-effects have been considered and been rendered
impossible, document those and explain that they have been accounted
for.
2. Rename "AutoArchive" to "Clean up completed tasks" and add a "Clean
up completed tasks" button to the main screen. This will put control
back in the users' hands, and we will be able to clean up completed
tasks when we know it's safe--such as right after a review.
3. Rename "Run AutoArchive every [number] days" to "Clean up completed
tasks every [number] days" and move the option to the bottom of the
"Clean up completed tasks" options (formerly AutoArchive options), for
people who want the auto-cleanup feature.
4. Remove the "Prompt before AutoArchive runs" checkbox. The "Clean up
completed tasks" button in the main screen eliminates the need for
this option.
5. Rename "Clean out completed tasks only with all subtasks completed"
to "Skip tasks with incomplete subtasks."
6. Replace "Copy old tasks to archive/Remove old tasks after copy"
compound option with a single "Move completed tasks to archive"
option. As I mentioned earlier, the "copy to archive and keep in main
file" option is equivalent to disabling the Clean up (formerly
AutoArchive) feature and enabling the Backup feature.
7. Move the "Do not archive tasks in this branch" checkbox from the
Advanced Task Properties dialog to the Properties page and rename it
to "Do not clean up this branch."
8. Bonus points: show the list of "Do not clean up" branches in the
"Clean up completed tasks" settings (formerly AutoArchive settings).
If even just the first two changes were made, I don't think I ever
would have had any question about what I should do with my completed
tasks.
Again, sorry for coming off so crabby. That part of my original post
was only intended to convey my confusion and frustration in trying to
answer what (to me) seemed like a basic and inevitable question that
should have a simple answer...yet I still remain clueless about what I
should be doing with my completed tasks.
Dwight
Nov 13, 2011, 2:22:45 AM11/13/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Rob, as you know, MLO is a complex tool with a lot of power and the
ability to support a wide variety of usage patterns. It can support
simple usage and complex usage. If you want to use a complex tool like
this in a simple way, a part of the cost is that you have to give up
obsessing about the possibility that some complex alternative might
have been better.
It sounds to me a though you are suffering some sort of post-traumatic
stress as a result of having had a hard time with outlook's auto-
archive. Many of your suggestions seem to me to be nothing more than
trying to stamp out the words "auto-archive." I think this would be a
shame, as they are widely used words that are understood by many
people. Changing to a somewhat fuzzier phrase about cleaning up
completed tasks does not sound helpful to me.
A second point you seem to be making is that there could be better
beginner-level documentation. ok, I will agree with you on that one.
I don't think that your option 2 works. You mention confusion any time
you need to unhide completed, but it's not just that. As the database
grows to hold all the completed tasks it will get heavy and eventually
slow your system down.
My auto-archive usage is that daily, I move all completed tasks to an
archive file. Sometimes I need to research something from the archive
so it's nice to have it. This works fine for me and I have no
problems and nothing is mystifying. The only issue is that I have to
mark recurring tasks that have subtasks a do-not-archive, as you
mentioned. I would like to see a default setting for this.
-Dwight
.
ability to support a wide variety of usage patterns. It can support
simple usage and complex usage. If you want to use a complex tool like
this in a simple way, a part of the cost is that you have to give up
obsessing about the possibility that some complex alternative might
have been better.
It sounds to me a though you are suffering some sort of post-traumatic
stress as a result of having had a hard time with outlook's auto-
archive. Many of your suggestions seem to me to be nothing more than
trying to stamp out the words "auto-archive." I think this would be a
shame, as they are widely used words that are understood by many
people. Changing to a somewhat fuzzier phrase about cleaning up
completed tasks does not sound helpful to me.
A second point you seem to be making is that there could be better
beginner-level documentation. ok, I will agree with you on that one.
I don't think that your option 2 works. You mention confusion any time
you need to unhide completed, but it's not just that. As the database
grows to hold all the completed tasks it will get heavy and eventually
slow your system down.
My auto-archive usage is that daily, I move all completed tasks to an
archive file. Sometimes I need to research something from the archive
so it's nice to have it. This works fine for me and I have no
problems and nothing is mystifying. The only issue is that I have to
mark recurring tasks that have subtasks a do-not-archive, as you
mentioned. I would like to see a default setting for this.
-Dwight
.
Rob
Nov 13, 2011, 5:33:16 AM11/13/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Going to try to keep it short for a change... :-)
> It sounds to me a though you are suffering some sort of post-traumatic
> stress as a result of having had a hard time with outlook's auto-
> archive.
No, I usually disabled it in Outlook. I just noticed that MLO seemed
to borrow the paradigm, but then added options which make
"autoarchive" a misnomer since the feature can be configured to copy
or delete items instead of just moving them.
> Many of your suggestions seem to me to be nothing more than
> trying to stamp out the words "auto-archive." I think this would be a
> shame, as they are widely used words that are understood by many
> people. Changing to a somewhat fuzzier phrase about cleaning up
> completed tasks does not sound helpful to me.
I admit I'm nitpicking about the name, but the name does not
accurately represent all of the feature's options. Imagine going into
a restaurant where all the sandwiches are called turkey sandwiches
regardless of what's on them. You order a vegetarian sandwich and your
friend orders a hamburger. The waiter reads back your order: "That
would be one vegetarian turkey sandwich and one ground beef turkey
sandwich, correct?" The name "turkey sandwich" in this case is
confusing and misleading, just as the term "*archive" is misleading
when used to describe the action of copying or deleting.
Variations of the phrase "clean up completed tasks" are used
extensively in the autoarchive settings dialog. I don't think changing
the feature name to more accurately reflect the capabilities of the
feature would cause any confusion in this case. I do understand that
none of the changes I've proposed on behalf of confused new users
everywhere are likely to be implemented in MLO anytime soon, if at
all, but maybe these discussions will help other confused newbies.
> I don't think that your option 2 works. You mention confusion any time
> you need to unhide completed, but it's not just that. As the database
> grows to hold all the completed tasks it will get heavy and eventually
> slow your system down.
Clicking the "clean up completed tasks" button would perform the same
action that autoarchive currently performs. The only difference is
that people who would otherwise have autoarchive prompt before running
could now do it on-demand instead of having to wonder whether
autoarchive will do the right thing.
> My auto-archive usage is that daily, I move all completed tasks to an
> archive file. Sometimes I need to research something from the archive
> so it's nice to have it. This works fine for me and I have no
> problems and nothing is mystifying. The only issue is that I have to
> mark recurring tasks that have subtasks a do-not-archive, as you
> mentioned. I would like to see a default setting for this.
> -Dwight
Thanks for sharing your archive settings; I'm glad I asked before
trying autoarchive. I had hoped autoarchive would auto-skip recurring
tasks but would have half expected yet another checkbox for that. (NO!
Please do not take that remark as a feature request! :-P) I wouldn't
expect everyone to consider that potential pitfall up front. Did you
have to figure out the hard way that you have to mark recurring tasks
as do-not-archive?
> It sounds to me a though you are suffering some sort of post-traumatic
> stress as a result of having had a hard time with outlook's auto-
> archive.
to borrow the paradigm, but then added options which make
"autoarchive" a misnomer since the feature can be configured to copy
or delete items instead of just moving them.
> Many of your suggestions seem to me to be nothing more than
> trying to stamp out the words "auto-archive." I think this would be a
> shame, as they are widely used words that are understood by many
> people. Changing to a somewhat fuzzier phrase about cleaning up
> completed tasks does not sound helpful to me.
accurately represent all of the feature's options. Imagine going into
a restaurant where all the sandwiches are called turkey sandwiches
regardless of what's on them. You order a vegetarian sandwich and your
friend orders a hamburger. The waiter reads back your order: "That
would be one vegetarian turkey sandwich and one ground beef turkey
sandwich, correct?" The name "turkey sandwich" in this case is
confusing and misleading, just as the term "*archive" is misleading
when used to describe the action of copying or deleting.
Variations of the phrase "clean up completed tasks" are used
extensively in the autoarchive settings dialog. I don't think changing
the feature name to more accurately reflect the capabilities of the
feature would cause any confusion in this case. I do understand that
none of the changes I've proposed on behalf of confused new users
everywhere are likely to be implemented in MLO anytime soon, if at
all, but maybe these discussions will help other confused newbies.
> I don't think that your option 2 works. You mention confusion any time
> you need to unhide completed, but it's not just that. As the database
> grows to hold all the completed tasks it will get heavy and eventually
> slow your system down.
action that autoarchive currently performs. The only difference is
that people who would otherwise have autoarchive prompt before running
could now do it on-demand instead of having to wonder whether
autoarchive will do the right thing.
> My auto-archive usage is that daily, I move all completed tasks to an
> archive file. Sometimes I need to research something from the archive
> so it's nice to have it. This works fine for me and I have no
> problems and nothing is mystifying. The only issue is that I have to
> mark recurring tasks that have subtasks a do-not-archive, as you
> mentioned. I would like to see a default setting for this.
> -Dwight
trying autoarchive. I had hoped autoarchive would auto-skip recurring
tasks but would have half expected yet another checkbox for that. (NO!
Please do not take that remark as a feature request! :-P) I wouldn't
expect everyone to consider that potential pitfall up front. Did you
have to figure out the hard way that you have to mark recurring tasks
as do-not-archive?
Dwight
Nov 13, 2011, 8:31:32 AM11/13/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Yes, you are right about that. I did discover the need to disable
archiving for recurring tasks with subtasks by hard experience. I was
archiving tasks that had been completed for a week, and almost all of
my recurring tasks got completed in less than a week.but every once in
a while I would discover that done recurring task had been stripped of
all the easy tasks and retained only the hard ones. I manually re-
added a number of tasks before discovering that the missing tasks were
living on the archive file and then figured it out. Someone on this
forum advised me to use the do-not-archive flag and it worked.
In addition to recurring tasks, I disable archiving of tasks in any
project. Part of project management it's knowing not just what you
have to do but also what you have done. There's no point in computing
what percent fone a project if, if you remove the completed tasks
before computing.
I proposed that subtasks of repeating tasks and of uncompleted
projects be automatically excluded from archiving, but Andrey replied
that he did not want to be receiving angry mail from people who wanted
it to work as it does now. I proposed a seeing that would disable
archiving of these tasks, but it did not get much support and hasn't
been addressed.
I understand your point about sandwiches but let me tell you about my
screwdriver. In addition to driving screws it in also useful to pry
things, puncture things and in a pinch, the top of the handle
functions as a hammer. But if you tried to sell it under a generic,
more descriptive name you would just confuse people.
archiving for recurring tasks with subtasks by hard experience. I was
archiving tasks that had been completed for a week, and almost all of
my recurring tasks got completed in less than a week.but every once in
a while I would discover that done recurring task had been stripped of
all the easy tasks and retained only the hard ones. I manually re-
added a number of tasks before discovering that the missing tasks were
living on the archive file and then figured it out. Someone on this
forum advised me to use the do-not-archive flag and it worked.
In addition to recurring tasks, I disable archiving of tasks in any
project. Part of project management it's knowing not just what you
have to do but also what you have done. There's no point in computing
what percent fone a project if, if you remove the completed tasks
before computing.
I proposed that subtasks of repeating tasks and of uncompleted
projects be automatically excluded from archiving, but Andrey replied
that he did not want to be receiving angry mail from people who wanted
it to work as it does now. I proposed a seeing that would disable
archiving of these tasks, but it did not get much support and hasn't
been addressed.
I understand your point about sandwiches but let me tell you about my
screwdriver. In addition to driving screws it in also useful to pry
things, puncture things and in a pinch, the top of the handle
functions as a hammer. But if you tried to sell it under a generic,
more descriptive name you would just confuse people.
Dwight
Nov 13, 2011, 8:31:31 AM11/13/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Lisa Stroyan
Nov 13, 2011, 8:43:10 AM11/13/11
to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com
You could create a view that shows all completed tasks and delete whichever ones you want; then you don't have to find them. That's what I do, because I often don't want to delete everything. I also often delete my completed tasks as I'm reviewing my outline.
I put () in front of the caption anything that will be reset by a recurring parent or anything I manually reuse frequently. (e.g., return library books -- doesn't need a template, I just reuse the same task each time). It's just a visual cue for myself.
As for the venting, I just think you might want to consider your goals, as my guess is that you would get a lot more good information and answers from this group if you approached the product with curiosity rather than making sweeping assumptions and criticisms (that features are band-aids, poorly designed, or copied from Outlook for example).
Just to address the Inbox issue, that was a bug in beta software. That's kind of the nature of using a beta, no?
Lisa
On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 3:49 PM, Rob <rcz...@gmail.com> wrote:
Sorry, my little rant was not intended to offend anyone, but to point
out that the AutoArchive feature is too confusing.
...The aspect that blows my mind is that some things which should be
simple and obvious just aren't
... it should have certain features and they should function
a certain way.
...It's also a little weird that MLO relies on fans
...using AutoArchive--is incredibly confusing because of all
the options
...but now it has had one band-aid after another slapped on
in an attempt to fix some original design issues
Dwight
Nov 13, 2011, 10:36:14 AM11/13/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Rob, let me make sure that I'm not misleading you about archiving of
recurring tasks. It works fine, the only problem is the archiving of
subtasks of recurring tasks.
Gory details follow.
When I complete a recurring task, MLO does *not* make a completed copy
and then create a new copy. It just resets the dates to the new
interval and leaves the task open. (The situation is more complex when
the recurring task has subtasks, but that's out of scope for this
discussion)
Since the recurring task itself is never in "completed" status, it's
not a candidate for archiving, so it's not necessary to exclude it
from archiving.
Btw, this discussion shows a weakness of the uservoice paradigm. The
need to manually exclude subtasks of repeating tasks from archiving
was a big obstacle for me and was very annoying, until I figured it
out. But now that I get it, it's not such a big deal for me. I'm
certainly not altruistic enough to devote any of my uservoice votes to
fixing it, when there are other things that I really need today. So
nobody is representing the needs of the future users. A marketing
professor of mine taught that designing your products to meet the
needs and wants of your users is a sure path to stagnation, you need
to design for your future users instead.
recurring tasks. It works fine, the only problem is the archiving of
subtasks of recurring tasks.
Gory details follow.
When I complete a recurring task, MLO does *not* make a completed copy
and then create a new copy. It just resets the dates to the new
interval and leaves the task open. (The situation is more complex when
the recurring task has subtasks, but that's out of scope for this
discussion)
Since the recurring task itself is never in "completed" status, it's
not a candidate for archiving, so it's not necessary to exclude it
from archiving.
Btw, this discussion shows a weakness of the uservoice paradigm. The
need to manually exclude subtasks of repeating tasks from archiving
was a big obstacle for me and was very annoying, until I figured it
out. But now that I get it, it's not such a big deal for me. I'm
certainly not altruistic enough to devote any of my uservoice votes to
fixing it, when there are other things that I really need today. So
nobody is representing the needs of the future users. A marketing
professor of mine taught that designing your products to meet the
needs and wants of your users is a sure path to stagnation, you need
to design for your future users instead.
pottster
Nov 13, 2011, 5:49:29 PM11/13/11
to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com
fwiw...
I don't use auto-archive either. Don't need to, because: -
1. MLO, even after a number of years of accumulating many tasks, still hasn't slowed down.
2. My filtering needs are met by Outline>Hide completed tasks>Hide completed tasks older than (or an advanced filtered view if something more sophisticated is needed)
3. It's useful to be able to search a complete history of completed tasks.
4. I use a separate data file for Projects where I never hide completed. As said before, true projects, as opposed to simple tasks with subtasks, usually need full and detailed visibility of what's been completed.
The nomenclature and functionality of auto-archive is almost certainly a legacy of the days when MLO was first developed to sync with Outlook. Unfortunately, MLO is littered with such "ghosts of the past" which might give an incoherent impression to a newcomer. It's great to have so much flexibility but it can be a mixed blessing sometimes. I often think, with more mature software, the way to avoid bloat is a one-in one-out policy. Might be an interesting twist for User Voice i.e. vote for the least used functionality - it would provoke some debate I'm sure!
Rob
Nov 14, 2011, 8:42:09 PM11/14/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Thanks, pottster, Dwight, and Lisa.
pottster: Thanks a lot for the extra insights regarding keeping old
tasks. I never even noticed the "hide completed tasks older than"
submenu, so I'll try that. I was concerned about things getting slow
or unmanageable, but if you have years' worth of tasks stacked up and
haven't had any issues, I think it's worth a shot. I suppose my next
question would be whether this also works well on Android.
Dwight: yikes! I hadn't even thought about project progress being
messed up by the AutoArchive feature. I had only thought about
subtasks of recurring tasks being deleted. I would definitely vote for
the changes you suggested, because until those items are fixed, I
think there's far too much potential for AutoArchive to screw up my
projects and recurring tasks' descendants.
Lisa:
on AutoArchive, I should probably steer clear of it for now, and stick
to the suggestions you and pottster provided. To clarify, do you mean
View>Task Views/Completed by Projects?
> I put () in front of the caption anything that will be reset by a recurring
> parent or anything I manually reuse frequently. (e.g., return library books
> -- doesn't need a template, I just reuse the same task each time). It's
> just a visual cue for myself.
Thanks, that's a good tip. I could see myself neglecting to keep the
visual cue in sync with the task settings on occasion, but maybe I
would catch that during a review. One of my friends who uses OmniFocus
uses the same type of trick to implement a tag system since OmniFocus
doesn't have a tagging feature and only allows a single context to be
assigned to a task.
> Just to address the Inbox issue, that was a bug in beta software. That's
> kind of the nature of using a beta, no?
Yes, you did tell me that the <Inbox> having the "hide" flag set by
default was a bug. However, the trick to use the Active by Context
view and filter by (None) should still be documented in the GTD "case
study" on the website. (Speaking of which, it's not really a case
study; it's a tutorial. But I don't think it's worth discussing that
point in detail...it's just another observation.)
> As for the venting, I just think you might want to consider your goals, as
> my guess is that you would get a lot more good information and answers from
> this group if you approached the product with curiosity rather than making
> sweeping assumptions and criticisms (that features are band-aids, poorly
> designed, or copied from Outlook for example).
Generally, I classify any feature that exhibits unexpected undesirable
behavior as a defect. As Dwight has confirmed, AutoArchive has even
more detrimental side effects than I suspected. Although many options
have been added in an attempt to address the undesirable behavior,
they have all failed to address the root cause of the defective
behavior--namely, that the AutoArchive paradigm is not an appropriate
solution to the problems that this feature is trying to solve. You
call AutoArchive's options "features" and I call them "band-aids." I
did not call them band-aids in my original post.
At best, AutoArchive is confusing and has functionality that overlaps
the Backup feature--that's if you don't use projects or recurring
tasks with subtasks. At worst, you do use those other features, and
AutoArchive will screw up your recurring tasks' subtasks and your
project completion statuses unless you take special precautions to use
a well-hidden checkbox on each and every project or recurring task
with subtasks, to override AutoArchive's undesirable behavior. If it
were not poorly designed, then it would not exhibit this undesirable
behavior.
It would be a disservice to allow new users to think that AutoArchive
works as one would expect, so I do think it should be acceptable in
this case to cut to the chase and say that AutoArchive is a broken
feature. Software developers joke about calling defects "features,"
but I would hope nobody seriously regards these faulty behaviors as
features. For most of this discussion so far, I thought I was going to
use AutoArchive and just needed some suggestions on how to set it up
correctly, but now I've changed my mind. I think the feature is too
broken to use except as a last resort.
Criticism is not a purely negative thing. It is one of the forces that
drives people to be better. Nobody is perfect, and without criticism,
one cannot expect to reach his or her true potential. I certainly
could have tried to candy coat this from the start, but I think that
only would have lasted for 1 or 2 posts until I started to realize how
bad the feature was. I did try to inject some humor by suggesting the
developers "banish AutoArchive to the dark realm from whence it came,"
but I'm beginning to think it would be better in the long run to just
get rid of it (or at least hide it from new users who don't specify a
special command-line option), if the problems are not likely to ever
be fixed. There is some value in trying to appeal to the masses, but--
as Apple has proven with the iPad and iPhone--sometimes it's better to
keep it simple and only support a few basic features really well, then
gradually improve the product from there. By no means do I love Apple
(at heart I'm really a webOS fan), but I have to give them some
credit.
pottster: Thanks a lot for the extra insights regarding keeping old
tasks. I never even noticed the "hide completed tasks older than"
submenu, so I'll try that. I was concerned about things getting slow
or unmanageable, but if you have years' worth of tasks stacked up and
haven't had any issues, I think it's worth a shot. I suppose my next
question would be whether this also works well on Android.
Dwight: yikes! I hadn't even thought about project progress being
messed up by the AutoArchive feature. I had only thought about
subtasks of recurring tasks being deleted. I would definitely vote for
the changes you suggested, because until those items are fixed, I
think there's far too much potential for AutoArchive to screw up my
projects and recurring tasks' descendants.
Lisa:
> You could create a view that shows all completed tasks and delete whichever
> ones you want; then you don't have to find them. That's what I do, because
> I often don't want to delete everything. I also often delete my completed
> tasks as I'm reviewing my outline.
This is a good idea, too. I think given Dwight's in-depth discussion
> ones you want; then you don't have to find them. That's what I do, because
> I often don't want to delete everything. I also often delete my completed
> tasks as I'm reviewing my outline.
on AutoArchive, I should probably steer clear of it for now, and stick
to the suggestions you and pottster provided. To clarify, do you mean
View>Task Views/Completed by Projects?
> I put () in front of the caption anything that will be reset by a recurring
> parent or anything I manually reuse frequently. (e.g., return library books
> -- doesn't need a template, I just reuse the same task each time). It's
> just a visual cue for myself.
visual cue in sync with the task settings on occasion, but maybe I
would catch that during a review. One of my friends who uses OmniFocus
uses the same type of trick to implement a tag system since OmniFocus
doesn't have a tagging feature and only allows a single context to be
assigned to a task.
> Just to address the Inbox issue, that was a bug in beta software. That's
> kind of the nature of using a beta, no?
default was a bug. However, the trick to use the Active by Context
view and filter by (None) should still be documented in the GTD "case
study" on the website. (Speaking of which, it's not really a case
study; it's a tutorial. But I don't think it's worth discussing that
point in detail...it's just another observation.)
> As for the venting, I just think you might want to consider your goals, as
> my guess is that you would get a lot more good information and answers from
> this group if you approached the product with curiosity rather than making
> sweeping assumptions and criticisms (that features are band-aids, poorly
> designed, or copied from Outlook for example).
behavior as a defect. As Dwight has confirmed, AutoArchive has even
more detrimental side effects than I suspected. Although many options
have been added in an attempt to address the undesirable behavior,
they have all failed to address the root cause of the defective
behavior--namely, that the AutoArchive paradigm is not an appropriate
solution to the problems that this feature is trying to solve. You
call AutoArchive's options "features" and I call them "band-aids." I
did not call them band-aids in my original post.
At best, AutoArchive is confusing and has functionality that overlaps
the Backup feature--that's if you don't use projects or recurring
tasks with subtasks. At worst, you do use those other features, and
AutoArchive will screw up your recurring tasks' subtasks and your
project completion statuses unless you take special precautions to use
a well-hidden checkbox on each and every project or recurring task
with subtasks, to override AutoArchive's undesirable behavior. If it
were not poorly designed, then it would not exhibit this undesirable
behavior.
It would be a disservice to allow new users to think that AutoArchive
works as one would expect, so I do think it should be acceptable in
this case to cut to the chase and say that AutoArchive is a broken
feature. Software developers joke about calling defects "features,"
but I would hope nobody seriously regards these faulty behaviors as
features. For most of this discussion so far, I thought I was going to
use AutoArchive and just needed some suggestions on how to set it up
correctly, but now I've changed my mind. I think the feature is too
broken to use except as a last resort.
Criticism is not a purely negative thing. It is one of the forces that
drives people to be better. Nobody is perfect, and without criticism,
one cannot expect to reach his or her true potential. I certainly
could have tried to candy coat this from the start, but I think that
only would have lasted for 1 or 2 posts until I started to realize how
bad the feature was. I did try to inject some humor by suggesting the
developers "banish AutoArchive to the dark realm from whence it came,"
but I'm beginning to think it would be better in the long run to just
get rid of it (or at least hide it from new users who don't specify a
special command-line option), if the problems are not likely to ever
be fixed. There is some value in trying to appeal to the masses, but--
as Apple has proven with the iPad and iPhone--sometimes it's better to
keep it simple and only support a few basic features really well, then
gradually improve the product from there. By no means do I love Apple
(at heart I'm really a webOS fan), but I have to give them some
credit.
Tzal
Nov 17, 2011, 10:20:36 AM11/17/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Sorry if I missed this above, but how is auto-archive selectively
disabled as mentioned above? I don't see a per-item "don't auto-
archive me or my children" check box.
disabled as mentioned above? I don't see a per-item "don't auto-
archive me or my children" check box.
Tzal
Nov 17, 2011, 10:29:04 AM11/17/11
to MyLifeOrganized
OK, found it. That should be in the "general" tab, in my opinion.
Also, would an option like "archive task only if parent task is
completed" make sense?
Also, would an option like "archive task only if parent task is
completed" make sense?
Dwight
Nov 17, 2011, 5:07:42 PM11/17/11
to MyLifeOrganized
Hi, Tzal. "archive task only if parent is completed" is an interesting
suggestion but I can't quite figure out its value. In general I would
rather have to dig into advanced properties for a single parent than
for a bunch of children. Also, doing it at the child level would raise
the risk that new steps added mid-project would have this indicator
left off by mistake.
Your suggestion would be very useful if I wanted to have a project
where some tasks vanish on completion while others remain. I can only
think of one case for that, which is where I have a repeating routine
and I want to add a one-off task that will not be a part of future
recurrences. There's a request in uservoice for better handling of
this kind of thing. Can you think of other examples where this
functionality would be valuable?
-Dwight
ps I would still greatly prefer a global default "archiving skips
completed subtasks of projects or recurring tasks"
suggestion but I can't quite figure out its value. In general I would
rather have to dig into advanced properties for a single parent than
for a bunch of children. Also, doing it at the child level would raise
the risk that new steps added mid-project would have this indicator
left off by mistake.
Your suggestion would be very useful if I wanted to have a project
where some tasks vanish on completion while others remain. I can only
think of one case for that, which is where I have a repeating routine
and I want to add a one-off task that will not be a part of future
recurrences. There's a request in uservoice for better handling of
this kind of thing. Can you think of other examples where this
functionality would be valuable?
-Dwight
ps I would still greatly prefer a global default "archiving skips
completed subtasks of projects or recurring tasks"
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages