ThinkingRock Forum

Some users suggested that any action/sub-project created within a project gets the project priority by default? What is your opinion?

What about the project due date? I don't think Jeremy will be willing to validate that the action/sub-project Due Date is <= the project Due Date but we could put the project due date by default to remind the user.

Also all these default values are "easy" to set when you create the actions from the project tree but when the action is created in the process thoughts screen, it becomes a bit tricky as the project is selected after the action data has been entered. So we will probably only do it from the project tree.

_________________
Claire
ThinkingRock Analyst and Tester

I say yes. If I assign a particular priority to a project then I would like to see its tasks assigned the same priority on creation, just like they are currently assigned the same topic. I'd love to see a project-level context, with each task assigned the same context on creation.

(And while I'm dreaming, I'd love to see the same logic applied to sub-projects; they inherit the parent's attributes on creation.)

Thanks for continuing to improve TR and for considering our opinions on the subject!

We will assign the project priority to new action created within the tree (and don't worry, sub-project are treated the same as project, so actions within a sub-project will inherit its priority).

This will NOT apply when action is created in the Process thoughts screen for the reason explain previously.

_________________
Claire
ThinkingRock Analyst and Tester

Would it be possible to consider automatic inheritance of attributes like priority and due date if a sub-project or action doesn't explicitly have their own attributes set?

I've just started looking into TR as a replacement for Life Balance (I'm guessing you'll have quite a few new users since they're trying to get all their current users to pay for an upgrade) and I'm still trying to wrap my head around everything, but this is one of the first "oddities" I've come across.

I mean I can understand why it is the way it is, but I think most people would expect that if a project is due by a certain date, it's obvious that any and all sub-projects or actions are due by that date as well. So it's a bit "odd" that if I don't set these fields on every single object, then I don't get a true sense of what actions are important when I review them (i.e. they have missing due dates and priorities).

So I would like to see the ability to inherit attributes (this could be a global or per-project setting). The actual attribute doesn't need to even be stored/recorded against the object in question, but when I go to the review screens I'd like these missing attributes to be calculated and so my sorts, etc work as I would expect them too.

Would this be hard to implement?

(BTW - I think TR is absolutely awesome... I'm still reviewing but at this stage I think I'm going to give you guys the money that Life Balance are looking for their upgrade and ditch them altogether - well done guys!)

This is what will be implemented in the next version:
- priority: new actions and new projects priority set to parent project priority;
- due date: we are not planning to add anything at the moment. Later, we might add a validation that the due date of actions is =< than the one of the project.

_________________
Claire
ThinkingRock Analyst and Tester

Hi tick007

I am interested in how you think TR compares to Life Balance. I like LB but am finding TR more useful these days. The latest release of LB doesn't add m uch to the Windows version and, as you say, the Mac upgrade is fairly pricey. It may be worth it, I don't know but nonetheless, I still find myself in TR much more these days. I started a thread here:

http://thinkingrock.com.au/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1427

which may be a useful place to post comparisons etc.

Lee