Feature Request

[stef204]

etmtk 3.2.27 on linux 4.5.4

Currently, when one schedules a group task and sets an alarm, the alarm reminder box is triggered for ALL sub-tasks; so that if one has 6 sub-tasks, each a separate job, one gets six alert reminder boxes all at once.

Request is that each @j is addressed separately so that a reminder or alarm @A can be set for each sub-task individually.

[dagraham]

Could you post an example of a group task that causes the problem?

[stef204]

+ do top task @s 2016-06-08 10am @a 0m: m @b 1 @c whatever
@t whatever
@j do this first &q 1
@j do this second &q 2
@j do this third &q 3 @q 1
@z some time zone

[stef204]

I did not add the @q 1 myself--it was added automatically by etm!
I wondered about it and even tried to remove it but etm keeps putting it back. It behaves this way on all of my group tasks.

For the rest, I am not sure why you bring up the issue of & instead of @ since I seem to be using &.

The @t and @c @b in this particular case are there for the whole group and I did not intend to have individual ones for each sub-task, although I could (if etm accepts that.)

PS your reply looks weird, I see url's all over the place, is that what you intended? Possibly you need to use backticks around the @ otherwise I believe github starts to tag users, etc.

PPS It is not impossible that the alert reminder code which you added a few months ago does not take into account group task scenarios and may need to be modified to account for these, individually.

[therden]

_Stef:_ I can't reproduce the behavior of ETM auto-inserting an @q 1 into a new or edited item.

Are you certain that you don't have an @q 1 (which you probably intended to be &q 1) elsewhere in the item's text? (If so, it would sort to the end of the item when you Save.)

_Dan_: ETM presently moves at least two @ key-value pairs (@z and @q) to the end of a task group item (after the final job) upon Save.

I don't know if any other @ key-value pairs are treated similarly.

[dagraham]

The @q 1 is a bug - I thought you were putting it in and wondered why. The issue of @A attaching to each component task is, you could almost say, by intent - meaning that I never thought about it. In fact, @b suffers from the same issue. I suppose that the desired behavior would be to create just one alert and one beginby, both for “top task”. Yes? When &a and/or &b entries are placed within individual jobs, they should be added to any provided for the group task itself. Yes?

I’m still hoping you will give me an example of a group task with individual alerts as you would like to create it.

[dagraham]

I get the @q 1 added myself, but only to group tasks such as Stef’s example. For me, it only gets added when the group task is opened for editing in etm. Stranger still, if I enter a timestamp myself, such as @q now, then it gives saved, as it should, as @q 20160608T951. But if I open it for editing, it’s changed to @q 1. I’ll figure it out and fix it eventually.

On Jun 8, 2016, at 9:45 AM, therden <notifications@github.commailto:notifications@github.com> wrote:

Stef: I can't reproduce the behavior of ETM auto-inserting an @q 1 into a new or edited item.

Are you certain that you don't have an @q 1 (which you probably intended to be &q 1) elsewhere in the item's text? (If so, it would sort to the end of the item when you Save.)

Dan: ETM presently moves at least two @ key-value pairs (@z and @q) to the end of a task group item (after the final job) upon Save.

I don't know if any other @ key-value pairs are treated similarly.

—
You are receiving this because you commented.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_dagraham_etm-2Dtk_issues_60-23issuecomment-2D224593125&d=CwMCaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=cjSGCFDvj7Zy-plAeyNJjDIBRBeNSNbZaJLNyuBRtxo&m=bHwEwOLoSo0hT23YevgY7uOnL2UOmmcmX6iP6hPUktQ&s=29c9hGTDZtxOMprt47kxi4CBnbwKfBpS2_woNCAe4hA&e=, or mute the threadhttps://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_notifications_unsubscribe_AA-5FDpws0IiR5EvJc-2DqKfYAgReN7oY0lxks5qJsdcgaJpZM4Iso5K&d=CwMCaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=cjSGCFDvj7Zy-plAeyNJjDIBRBeNSNbZaJLNyuBRtxo&m=bHwEwOLoSo0hT23YevgY7uOnL2UOmmcmX6iP6hPUktQ&s=GlQwia7_GMqdUfxdqUka6MlkHXU3DbyT4KgE4oamGzA&e=.

[stef204]

You replies here are very difficult to read, as they are rife with really long url's like:

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_t&d=CwMCaQ&c=imBPVzF25OnBgGmVOlcsiEgHoG1i6YHLR0Sj_gZ4adc&r=cjSGCFDvj7Zy-plAeyNJjDIBRBeNSNbZaJLNyuBRtxo&m=HC-z1gyA5-7itkT4xNeZBpQ1IGXCbZrGeq5URC3hj38&s=9Nm2LpSUyCR4IN7ufHEVKwjCXg2ginv9g-RFgnz8vUw&e

Is that what you intended?

[stef204]

Here is an simple/brief example of the feature I would like.

I used &s and &a but these do not exist (yet) as I understand.

There are other more complex scenarios, I'm sure. But this below would be an improvement, basically due time and alarms treated individually for each task/sub-task in the group.

+ do top task @s 2016-06-18 10am @a 0m: m @b 1 @c whatever
@t whatever
@j do this first &q 1 &s 2016-06-09 2pm &a 0m: m
@j do this second &q 2 &s 2016-06-14 4pm &a 0m: m
@j do this third &q 3 &s 2016-06-17 5pm &a 0m: m
@z some time zone

[dagraham]

No, evidently it happens if I respond to an email. I only meant to indicate that I have the same problem with spurious @q 1 entries that you do.

[dagraham]

How about replacing this:

• do top task @s 2016-06-18 10am @A 0m: m @b 1 @c whatever
  @t whatever
  @j do this first &q 1 &s 2016-06-09 2pm &a 0m: m
  @j do this second &q 2 &s 2016-06-14 4pm &a 0m: m
  @j do this third &q 3 &s 2016-06-17 5pm &a 0m: m
  @z some time zone

with this:

• do top task @s 2016-06-18 10am @A 0m: m @b 1 @c whatever
  @t whatever
  @j do this first &q 1 &s 8d20h &a 0m: m
  @j do this second &q 2 &s 3d18h &a 0m: m
  @j do this third &q 3 &s 17h &a 0m: m
  @z some time zone

It expresses exacty the same task starting datetimes and alarms but relative to the group @s entry and could be turned into a repeating group task by just adding, e.g., @r m, to the top line.

[stef204]

OK, sorry to mention the url problems but wasn't sure what was going on--I guess it happens only when replying via email.

OK, you confirm the @q 1; it is a bug. I do not know if it has any impact on the task group or not....

Anyway, one way to go about it could be to have all elements/values inserted on top task/ top line automatically apply to sub-tasks UNLESS a sub-task has its own elements/values defined unto itself, in which case these individually defined elements/value would take precedence over those of the top task's.

That way, if one wants to apply some elements/values to ALL tasks/sub-tasks, it if sufficient to add them for top task; BUT if one wants more granularity, one can add whatever elements to each sub-task which will then have its own....

Not sure if I am clear or not.

[stef204]

Sorry our replies just crossed.

When I create the group task, I don't want to be calculating how many days and hours before top task is due to set my alarms, etc. 8 days 20 hours would be tedious.

I just would like to pick a date/time and be done with it. If this is available with some kind of fuzzy dating, etc., and it produces result above, fine. If not, I would really want to be able to state: @j do this second &q 2 &a 2016-06-15 2pm

[dagraham]

Well, etm will calculate those for you - tools/date and time calculator - or you could just stick to days. ;-)

I. myself, don't have much enthusiam for working on this unless repetition can be incorporated in a transparent manner. Most group tasks that I need are ones that repeat - the steps to prepare my tax returns each year, for example - otherwise I would probably use a series of separate tasks with a shared tag or keyword. Even in the absence of repetition, I might want to change the due date and would much prefer the individual jobs to adjust automatically than to require my editing.

[stef204]

Individual tasks just aren't the same; IMHO task groups should really be part and parcel of a task manager.

I don't see any problems with tasks repeating or not (i.e. they should repeat only if desired.)

How do I create the sub-task in a way that I don't have to calculate how many days and hours prior to top line task my alarm trigger time is for a set day and time?

i.e. how do I write the task so alarm for sub-task 2 gets triggered on 2016-06-17 5pm? Without having to calculate that is x day and x hours before top line task is due, so without having to write it&s 0d17h &a 0m: m ?

Edit: Sorry, re-reading your reply, you are suggesting using the date/time calculator..... I guess it can be done but not convenient in this situation. Being able to directly write the day and time would be significantly better.

Also, please and vital: you've got to remove those alarms defined for top tasks triggering an alarm and alert dialog for each sub-task. Imagine you have 8 sub-tasks? I get 8 alert dialog popping up!! That is just..... wrong ;)

[therden]

Task groups would be most useful for multi-step processes that are performed more than once for me also -- and that in such cases, using relative datetime values for &s will maximize that re-usability. But it'd be nice to also support direct-assigned datetime values for other use cases like those stef204 apparently has in mind.

Am I missing something? Are these two approaches irreconcilable? Or hard to implement together?

Maybe when the 'root' of the Task group item contains @s and@r values, and one or more jobs have direct-assigned &s datetime values which are incompatible, then ETM could raise an error message and let the user sort it out (just as it would do for other items with an @r rule and incompatible @f or @- values.)