ForumsQuestionsHow soon can we expect task-dependencies to be added?
How soon can we expect task-dependencies to be added?
| Author | Message |
|---|---|
|
yony120 |
For the Toodledo developers, how soon can we, the users, expect a task-dependency feature to be available?
I'm considering to move to Omnifocus (for iPhone) as soon as I get an iPod touch, because it's the only one with dependencies feature that is not too expensive (no monthly fees at all, actually). However, I do not have a Mac, and I think I would rather use my computer when at home rather than an iPod touch 3.5" screen, but I'm a GTDer, and I split my projects to short tasks, so I REALLY need dependencies. How soon, then? :) This message was edited Sep 18, 2009. |
|
Linden |
Unfortunately, Toodledo never comments on timelines.
I'm sure this due to the difficulty in predicting complicated programming tasks. It's so easy to discover a snag right after you decide the perfect solution has presented itself. Task dependencies will require a major change to the structure of tasks in relation to one another. Not only must a task know whether it is standalone, a parent, or a subtask (and which parent/subtask it is linked to), but will now need to know its relationship to OTHER subtasks. Add on top of that ensuring that the user interface for managing this is easy and doesn't interfere with other features. Toodledo is definitely aware of how high a priority it is, and I'm sure they're trying to get it to us as soon as possible. |
|
WizOne Solutions |
I just use subtasks for this myself. I like Toodledo so much I'm willing to deal with workarounds where necessary :)
With Search, tagging, statuses, and notes you could probably rig something passable up. All the best. |
|
Linden |
Good point. I missed the fact that the original poster didn't have a pro membership.
@yony120: If you get a Pro membership, you can have subtasks. Most GTDers are using the parent task as the project and subtasks for the steps. At the moment, there's no way to manually order the steps among those subtasks, and it's a common request that I assumed you were referring to. The workaround I use (when order is important) is to simply put a number at the beginning of the task name. I'm a Pro member and definitely found the $15 (annual) fee to be well worth it, considering the impact it had compared to a similar amount spent on entertainment (just as an example). This message was edited Sep 18, 2009. |
|
yony120 |
I've tried the 7-day Toodledo Pro trial. Subtasks are great, indeed, but if you set the statuses of your subtasks appropriately (Next Action for the first physical action(s) and Hold or Waiting for the rest), as soon as you complete your next action, you won't see that project in the Next Actions list anymore. So you have to browses through tasks and their subtasks, one by one, in order to find where there's something that can be done.
Subtasks are not an alternative to task-dependencies. You need them both for GTD, actually. And I don't mind paying even $30 a year for Toodledo Pro as long as it has task-dependencies. Without that, I would rather pay even more for something that does support it. The problem is that the others (like Omnifocus that will actually require me to BUY A MAC or Nozbe that is $7 A MONTH) are not affordable to me, since I'm a high-school student who doesn't work. So, Toodledo is my only hope for a both desktop and mobile GTD system. I could buy Omnifocus for the iPhone for just $10, but accessing it only through the iPhone is not so cool. This message was edited Sep 18, 2009. |
|
Anders |
I agree with you that subtasks are not the same thing as dependencies, but I don't think the following is necessarily correct.
Posted by yony120: I've tried the 7-day Toodledo Pro trial. Subtasks are great, indeed, but if you set the statuses of your subtasks appropriately (Next Action for the first physical action(s) and Hold or Waiting for the rest), as soon as you complete your next action, you won't see that project in the Next Actions list anymore. So you have to browses through tasks and their subtasks, one by one, in order to find where there's something that can be done. First of all, I'm no GTD expert. I just recently read the book for the first time (though I have listened to the audiobook a couple of times). However, my general impression is that there are a lot of people that think GTD has all these hard and fast rules and nomenclature, and I don't see where much of it comes from. Yes, you must have a Next Action, but where did David Allen ever say that when using an online task manager, you should label all other actions in a project as Hold or Waiting? Hold seems completely inappropriate to me. While I have tried out Waiting for this purpose before, I felt it was a stretching the definition of Waiting. Why not just leave them as No Status? I used Active for a while, but ultimately decided I was only doing it to fill up the tasks fields. There is no real reason to assign any status at all. As far as the next Next Action not showing up in your NA list after you complete the current one, I want to mention two things. You can easily set up a saved search that will keep any parent task that has subtasks in the view. In fact, I'm not clear on how you are viewing your Next Actions list. If it is by Status, then your parent wouldn't be in the view in the first place unless it also had NA status, but then it would not go away after completing the NA subtask. So I'm confused. It sounds like you must be using a saved search, in which case you can easily change the parent task disappearing. Here is what I do. If I expect to be working on a number of things from the same project, I will just look at that group of tasks, and then it is easy to assign NAs. When I want to look at Next Actions only, I sort by Status. If tasks are Flattened, all Next Actions appear at the top, and all Active projects are right below. Then if I need to assign a new Next Action, I just scroll down to the appropriate project below. I often use a sort of hybrid method with Hidden subtasks. I just close all dividers but Next Action and Active, and I get a view of all my standalone tasks and all my projects that have current Next Actions. Anyway, dependencies would be great, and Toodledo has said that they are planned, but Linden is right, Toodledo never comments on release dates. They do deliver awesome updates on a regular basis though. This message was edited Sep 18, 2009. |
|
yony120 |
You are right. David Allen does not mention task dependencies in his book. But I still find such a feature essential to prevent time wasting.
I guess I'll have to keep looking for a better solution. |
|
Anders |
I think you entirely miss my point. I can see the value in task dependencies. My comment about the GTD system was specifically related to the status designations you are using for project actions that are not next actions.
I was mostly just wondering how you are viewing your Next Actions, since I cannot figure out how you would achieve the behavior you describe, and I believe that is an issue that could be easily solved if you would provide a little information on what you are doing. |
|
Proximo |
I agree with Anders. GTD can be implemented entirely of partially. Depending on what you need to be productive.
I also would like task dependencies to make projects flow from one Next Action to the next automatically. If this get's implemented, it must be an option because I may finish the Next Action of a Project, only to find out I can't start on the Next Item on the list due to shifts in Priorities. |
|
thpope |
I want toodledo to hide tasks that can't be done until something else happens. I think that's the real point of task dependencies. For example, I must put on my socks before my shoes. So I should only see Put On Socks, and when I complete that, I only see Put On Shoes.
Btw, I was checking out nowdothis.com and really like the whole idea of pushing one thing at a time. This is such a simply concept, that I would love to see Toodledo add it. |
|
Jake Toodledo Founder |
Thanks for the suggestion.
|
You cannot reply yet
U Back to topic home
R Post a reply
To participate in these forums, you must be signed in.