| |
neil
|
 Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:39 pm Post subject: 'Dependencies' questions |
 |
|
|
What is the purpose of Dependencies? Is it just to show up visually in the Timeline?
Do Resources with Notifications turned on get Alerts once the Task that it's dependent on is completed?
How does one add a specific Dependency in the Timeline? Or, where are the instructions on how to do this?
Is it possible to delete a Dependency in the Timeline? |
|
| |
|
 |
gozer
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2008 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 12
Location: Melbourne
|
Hi Neil - I'm not sure of the greater purpose for 'dependencies' - however they show up in the timeline (visually as you've noted) and they also show up as a small list inside the task windows themselves - which appears as a concise sentence. To add a dependency in the timeline you click on the double 'egg-timer' icon or dependency tool (third from the left in the time-line toolbar), then drag the line that appears to the beginning or end of the task that one is dependant on. The line that is on the right of any task represents the beginning of that task, while the line to the left represents the finish of that task.
So: If you have 2 Tasks, and Task2 'starts' when Task1 'finishes'. Click the dependency icon, then grab the dependency line on the left (start) of Task2 and drag it to link at the Right (finish) of Task1 - if it turns red it means that you have your tasks in a date order that does not fit the depencency you asked for. This all sounds complicated now that I'm attempting to write it down. What we found helped us was knowing that the item you click on first always becomes the first item in the sentence "ItemX (starts/ends) when Item XX (starts/ends)...umm, hope that helps a little. |
|
| |
|
|
neil
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 1:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
One question still unanswered: Is it possible to delete a dependency in a timeline?
One problem I now have is that I can't delete a dependency I created in the timeline even in the task page. The text of the dependency changes to "This finishes when finishes (Remove)" when I click on edit, which seems like a bug. |
|
| |
|
|
Ben
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 4:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
| You can't delete a dependency in the timeline, only by clicking 'remove' in the task view. |
|
| |
|
|
dweller
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 9:53 pm Post subject: Re: 'Dependencies' questions |
|
|
|
| neil wrote: |
| Do Resources with Notifications turned on get Alerts once the Task that it's dependent on is completed? |
Not sure - however, getting a notification that a task is finished and is triggering the next task would be very beneficial.
Is this how the dependancies work? Because right now, they seem to be only reference points. |
|
| |
|
|
Ben
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Yep, at the moment a dependency is a visual connection between two tasks. It will show red if it is made an illegal dependency, however Copper won't assume and shift tasks the way other tools do.
Remember any change to a task has a flow on effect to availabilities of resources, so managing that neatly is the challenge.
For example, you shift task 1 one week over, if we made Copper shift all dependent tasks it would need to reallocate or at least prompt you to reallocate the resources booked for those tasks. You can see how a firm running multiple projects and tasks might find that counterintuitive. |
|
| |
|
|
gozer
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 01, 2008 1:42 am Post subject: dependencies |
|
|
Joined: 03 Sep 2007
Posts: 12
Location: Melbourne
|
| Yeah, as far as we can see - the dependencies do seem to be for reference only. When someone here completes an item that another is dependant upon we get them to send notification to the owner of the next task (however we are in a small space, so often we do just tell each other). this works well as often we do end up having overlap between these items, if the first has gone overtime. Cheers. |
|
| |
|
|
sine909
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 1:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
To throw in my 2 (or 4 now that the dollar sucks) cents...
I understand that resource leveling across projects is a big technical and conceptual hurdle, but dependencies having no effect seems like a pretty large limitation for nearly anyone, and a huge time sink, at least the way I work - and I assume (based on my experience), many other users.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but if I have a Project with ~60 unique tasks in it (common for me), and one of the first 5 were to slip a few days, I'd essentially need to manually move every single other task, constantly looking for red lines to instruct me to do so?
Here is where I'm coming from.... I was taught that you essentially (1) List your tasks, (2) Assign durations to them, (3) Assign resources to them, (4) Assign dependencies to them, and then (5) Let the software handle leveling them out appropriately for you - which gives you a nice picture of how your project will play out. It seems like without that last step - you're doing a lot of manual work. Am I missing something there?
And while I'm obviously being a newbie - I find that projects themselves have timelines, that have no relation to the tasks/subtasks in them? From my experience, when you have sub-tasks, the container (no longer a task on its own obviously) automatically adjusts its length to the sub-tasks themselves. Is that different in this system?
And lastly, while I'm dreaming - I know it's complex but resource leveling across projects (IE if I create a task that requires Jim, and Jim is busy that day, it moves the task out a day automatically) is one of the single most important features I'm looking for in a tool like this. I run a small business with ~20 employees, and ~15-20 projects (from small initiatives, to ongoing software development, to outsourced projects) - and accurately planning out projects based on time available, is absolutely crucial for what I do. |
|
| |
|
|
Ben
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
One thing you need to be careful of is assuming that your requirements are the same as the majority. We work tirelessly to track and manage the feedback we get, and it consistently surprises us that there are often customers at completely odds with each other but adamant that their way is how everyone would want it 
That said, if you have 60 tasks, you CAN use the multiselect tool to grap the bottom 55 tasks and drag them all across a few days.
If we made it so that use of the software automatically shifted tasks, I can guarantee we'd have a raft of new issues with regard to resourcing.
You mention: " (5) Let the software handle leveling them out appropriately for you". This is how MS Project works, but it DOES NOT give you finite resourcing (i.e. set a resource's actual availability and use up that time when you allocate them to tasks). Instead it uses a shoddy % allocation system, and as a result you have markedly inaccurate timelines again and again.
One day we will resolve it, but it will require adding complexity, it will require more budget, and it will require a lot of testing. It's definitely not something you can solve overnight though, so as a principle we ask Copper never to assume anything about what you wanted to do (the frustration of MS Project), we give you visual indicators, and a quick way to shift things around in order to keep track of your project.
I can envisage a point at which the timeline has a button 'Shift all tasks based on depdendencies' that results in a popup that has you confirm all of the resourcing issues this creates, and then either shifts them or you have to then go and shift them. I will say that v4.0 is a shift in this direction. |
|
| |
|
|
dweller
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:44 am Post subject: Re: dependencies |
|
|
|
| gozer wrote: |
| Yeah, as far as we can see - the dependencies do seem to be for reference only. When someone here completes an item that another is dependant upon we get them to send notification to the owner of the next task (however we are in a small space, so often we do just tell each other). this works well as often we do end up having overlap between these items, if the first has gone overtime. Cheers. |
Same here. I'd prefer if it triggered the start of the next task without augmenting the finish date of the task. We have one indivudual who works off site and isn't always aware of when we finish a particualr task. |
|
| |
|
|
Ben
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:02 am Post subject: Re: dependencies |
|
|
|
| dweller wrote: |
| gozer wrote: |
| Yeah, as far as we can see - the dependencies do seem to be for reference only. When someone here completes an item that another is dependant upon we get them to send notification to the owner of the next task (however we are in a small space, so often we do just tell each other). this works well as often we do end up having overlap between these items, if the first has gone overtime. Cheers. |
Same here. I'd prefer if it triggered the start of the next task without augmenting the finish date of the task. We have one indivudual who works off site and isn't always aware of when we finish a particualr task. |
And what happens when Start date goes _over_ the finish date? |
|
| |
|
|
dweller
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 7:21 pm Post subject: Re: dependencies |
|
|
|
| Ben wrote: |
| dweller wrote: |
| gozer wrote: |
| Yeah, as far as we can see - the dependencies do seem to be for reference only. When someone here completes an item that another is dependant upon we get them to send notification to the owner of the next task (however we are in a small space, so often we do just tell each other). this works well as often we do end up having overlap between these items, if the first has gone overtime. Cheers. |
Same here. I'd prefer if it triggered the start of the next task without augmenting the finish date of the task. We have one indivudual who works off site and isn't always aware of when we finish a particualr task. |
And what happens when Start date goes _over_ the finish date? |
Seems to me that if a task runs long and goes over the finish date that something, probably the schedule, should have been addressed before the task was actually completed. I do see your point though.
Regardless - I'd still like to see 'dependencies' work as triggers. As I think the benefits outway the potential problems. |
|
| |
|
|
neil
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
I just discovered by accident a rather useful feature of Dependencies:
I thought it was rather unhelpful to have Tasks show up in the Springboard whose start date hadn't even arrived yet. However, it appears they won't show up if it were dependent on another Task being completed first. That alone was worth creating a Dependency.
The question is, once the start date of that dependent Task rolls around and the Task it's dependent on isn't completed, does it still show up in the Springboard? |
|
| |
|
|
gabrielblau
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 5:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Joined: 12 Jun 2008
Posts: 5
Location: New York, NY
|
| neil wrote: |
I just discovered by accident a rather useful feature of Dependencies:
I thought it was rather unhelpful to have Tasks show up in the Springboard whose start date hadn't even arrived yet. However, it appears they won't show up if it were dependent on another Task being completed first. That alone was worth creating a Dependency.
The question is, once the start date of that dependent Task rolls around and the Task it's dependent on isn't completed, does it still show up in the Springboard? |
Actually, this is what I'd REALLY like to see (so I can create tasks far into the future of a project but not have staff looking at a list a mile long that they can't work on yet). Unfortunately, it doesn't work for us the way you describe it. regardless of dependencies, the tasks show up in the spring board. |
|
| |
|
|
