> > Bug

Confusion with efforts


Aug 18, 2006
Aug 18, 2006 / burger
Jan 5, 2009 / phsouzacruz

Attached files


#1992 by pixtur, 8k
This task does not have any text yet.
Doubleclick here to add some.



12 years ago

We have some strange/illogical behaviour with the efforts:

  • project with tasks but no folders
    • you cannot assign an effort to a task => no effort sum in the task overview (0 h)
  • project with tasks and folders
    • if there exists a folder then you can assign an effort to a task (e.g. right mouse key)
    • if you choose the 'book new effort' link (right display corner) or base board button then you can only assign an effort to a folder but not to a single task
  • edit effort
    • if the effort is assigned to a task within the folder, you can only assign the effort to that folder
    • if theres no folder, you cannot assign the effort to another task/folder
so we have three szenarios to think of.
Principially you should be able to assign an effort to whatever task/folder (within the project) you like.
So we need the same drop-down list in whatever szenario you are.

Possibilites of the values of the drop-down list:
  1. every single task/folder of the project is shown (tree-view)
  2. you can assign the effort to a task within the selected folder (but what happens, if you choose "book new effort" or base board button?)
  3. you can only assign the task via context-menu to a single task/folder
so the discussion is opened! ;)


12 years ago

So what should we do in that case?

pixtur:Did your see the new code?

12 years ago

I implemented a similar code some days ago in effortEdit(). I think it did listed..
  • all open tasks if no folders
  • all folders and the currently assigned tasks, if folders
It's not perfect, I know...

binder:Reply to Did your see the new code?

12 years ago

I think in most cases this should be sufficient?

burger:New Comment

12 years ago (2. update 12 years ago)

You wrote that you solved the problem with the assignment of efforts to tasks or folders, but I didn't see any changes.

So I looked at the code (effortEdit()) and saw that the variable 'folders_only' was set to 'true'.
Therefore I would like to know if this ('folders_only'=>true) was on purpose or not?

If not I will change it.

$folders= Task::getAll(array(
            'parent_task'=> 0,
            'folders_only'=>true, --> have to be false
            'status_min'=> STATUS_UPCOMING,
            'status_max'=> STATUS_CLOSED,
            'project'=> $project->id,


pixtur:well. I sorted the list for selecting...

12 years ago

see attached screenshot

burger:but ..

12 years ago (6. update 12 years ago)

  • I understand that you sorted the list for selecting, but if 'folders_only' is set to 'true' I don't see anything :-).

--> So, should I change this?
  • If I set the 'folders_only' to 'false' then I get a list like 'undefined', 'subtask1', 'maintask1', 'maintask1 > subtask1'.
--> Is this a bug ('subtask1' without the 'maintask'), because I only need 'undefined', 'maintask1' and 'maintask1 > subtask1'?

pixtur:So make it an option?

12 years ago

So should we distinguish some cases:
  1. Show all tasks which are not closed
  2. Show all folders which are not closed
  3. Show both

For this we also have to:

burger:Tooooooooooooo much ... ;)

12 years ago

Hello Tom,

I think the config page is to much and to complicated etc. ....

And a config page wasn't the intention of my previous comment.
It's really okay how it is now, but the only thing we were confused about is .... sorry I have to change to German now (English explanation: see previous comment) ...

Normalerweise sollte die Reihenfolge sein (wie bei deinem Screenshot):
  • undefiniert
  • Hauptaufgabe
  • Hauptaufgabe > Sub-Aufgabe
  • etc.
Momentan ist aber die Reihenfolge wie folgt:
  • undefiniert
  • Sub-Aufgabe
  • Hauptaufgabe
  • Hauptaufgabe > Sub-Aufgabe
  • etc.
--> Das heißt, die Sub-Aufgabe taucht zweimal auf.

Ich wollte deshalb nur fragen, ob man zur Vermeidung von Verwirrungen das erste 'Sub-Aufgabe' entfernen sollte und ob das überhaupt so gedacht war?

Wir wollten das halt nur mal erwähnt haben.
Auf keinen Fall wollten wir das ganze Thema verkomplizieren ;).


12 years ago

Sorry. I misunderstood you... Yeah, if the Task "Sub-Aufgabe" (marked bold in your comment) is the current task, then it must only be listed once. That's a bug. Can you fix it?