Yay! Repeating actions!

[AmberV]

Kudos on the "template" like ability to have a task group with a recurring interval, and all of the children reset with the group parent. It would maybe be nice to have some feedback as to whether or not an item is recurring, or simply a one-time due; though I'm sure that is something you've already considered.

The biggest concern I have with the current implementation is that it generates a new copy of the task(s), rather than simply reseting its completion state and adjusting the due date. I suppose I can see the merit in that for some things, but for other things which happen daily (like reminders to review things), that could make this awfully cluttered. I wonder if perhaps this behaviour should merit a preference, maybe as default with the ability to do a local override in the Inspector.

[BwanaZulia]

It should create a new task, as that is what kGTD does and gives you some history (meaning you can go back and see when and how many of those things you do).

BZ

[AmberV]

That may be nice for people that used KGTD, but I never did, and I personally have no use for several thousand copies of "Morning Review." I'd imagine the XML parser wouldn't, either, eventually. It is going to severely gum up the archival end of things after a years of usage; not to mention I'm going to have to be archiving much more frequently than I may like, to clear up highly active projects, where I may still want to keep a visible record going in slower projects. This is compounded by the fact that I like to plan in project mode with "All" turned on.

[BwanaZulia]

You don't have to archive, it happens automatically, it is just done.

Also, if you are doing something daily, why not just throw it in iCal?

Even if you were to take 365 x 3 years, that would only be a thousand tasks and that is not alot. They are using a database in the background that should be able to handle tens of thousands of tasks.

BZ

[AmberV]

Because I despise iCal. If I really wanted to use some external program to remind me of GTD specific tasks to do in my GTD program, I'd use the UNIX tool, Remind. But I really don't want to do that. The lack of recurrence and the need to use an external calendar program was why I dropped ThinkingRock ages ago. It seems reasonable to keep everything together. I'm all for delegating to specialist applications as opposed to monolith applications and all that, but this really seems to be splitting specialist hairs. :)

You are right on the math, I didn't express myself clearly. The fact is, I have a couple daily reminders and a weekly reminder for reviews, which is well over 1,500 junk archives after two years.

And this still doesn't address the fact that I have no use for a record of repeating actions, even for ones less routine than these reminders. I can simply look at the action, see its interval, and know that I've done it five times in the past year. I don't need to actually physically have five identical copies in an archive to know that.

[BwanaZulia]

Still think OF won't care about 1,500 or 3,000 or 5,000 tasks. It looks like it has a nice database backend, with a XML front end that is well cached.

Here is why I NEED a repeated task history.

- I have tasks that are not every day, they are every month or two months or two weeks or 10 weeks or yearly (yes, I do) and I want to be able to see when I did it last. History is important.

- It will help with the statistics in OmniFocus I am SURE that Ken is going to build me any day now.

- If I mark it complete and it goes away and it doesn't slow down my system, I don't care how much history I keep.

BZ

[AmberV]

I didn't realise the actual data storage was going on in a database. That certainly does help on the machine end of things, but it doesn't help on the human end. If I'm browsing through the archive in the hypothetical archive interface three years from now, looking for some project notes on something I'm doing right now, I'd like it to be relatively simple to do so. Having so many duplicates in the system would get in the way.

Anyway, like I said, I respect that some people might like this behaviour, that is fine. I just have no use for it, and I know it is going to be messy in the long term, and in the short term because my work preference is to have All tasks visible in project view. Personally, for me, I don't see the point. It is like expressing a line with a million points when an equation will do! Most of my repeating actions are fairly long term. I don't use weeks and months so much; so the average intervals for me are 50, 100, and 200 days. Then I have a few scattered year and multi-year intervals too. But even with these ones that are going to be generating less duplication, I still really do not need a copy to know I did it. The interval is 50, today is 159, that means I've done the task three times this year. Equation versus points.

I agree that history is important, but only to a degree. Saving absolutely everything is overkill. I'll archive for long term notes and such on interesting or complex things, but I'll delete grocery lists and utility bill reminders. I have no use for these things in the future. Likewise I have no use for 23 exact duplicates of an item, when I can just look at the interval and extrapolate in my mind.

[BwanaZulia]

Well, you are assume that it is the exact duplicate. The way it works now is I could change it.

(same task, just changed)
- Do something every day
- Do something better every other day
- Do something big and great every other month

I could have change that one task three times. In your system, I would never be able to go back and see what the original task was, what notes were attched to it, or when it was completed.

I keep everything. I have 80,000 emails going back 11 years.

While I might not go back and look at things in the past I want to know that they ar there so I can reference them if needed.

BZ

[AmberV]

No, I'm not assuming that. I'm talking about my own usage patterns here. I know for a fact that 99% of these tasks are never going to change until they become irrelevant. Then I'll make a new one. I don't keep notes on these things usually, and if I do, I just add as addenda to the original note.

I keep an extraordinary amount of archival data, too. But I draw the line at machine generated data that serves me no purpose, and transient mundane things that have no future value. I don't keep gigabytes of crash logs, for instance. I don't need to know what I bought at Target 7 years ago, either.

Neither of us is going to convince the other of anything, which is precisely why I suggested that this sort of behaviour be an option. There are people who do not need 80,000 emails and several hundred "buy milk" actions, and there are people that do.

[brooce]

Keeping everything's a little freaky, but I just wanted to chime in with a large THANK YOU to the team for getting recurring tasks in! I'm sure the logic behind the seemingly simple feature is quite a hairball, with plentiful opportunities to get it subtly wrong.

[BwanaZulia]

To get all GTD on you AmberV (in a good natured kind of way) if you are really doing something that trivial and mundane, it probably doesn't belong in your GTD system. :)

BZ

[Wild Rye]

There are people who do not need 80,000 emails and several hundred "buy milk" actions, and there are people that do.

Heh. I'm one of those who DO. I need to have my 4 or 5 daily repeating tasks in front of me in a Next Action checklist, things like "check tickler," otherwise I get involved in more expansive projects and forget to do my daily maintenance. Eventually all Hell breaks loose and I wind up cold, naked and lonely wandering the sewers of Paris.

That said, wouldn't it be cool to have "disolving" tasks that don't get archived when they get checked off?

Also, I'm hoping that repeating tasks will eventually have some of the following options:
1) Repeat every weekday (ie for checking the backup tapes at work)
2) Repeat on the 5th of every month (for making car payments)
3) Re-do 30 days after completion (for flea-treating the dogs)
4) Repeat every other Tuesday (for our small group Bible study)

[LizPf]

To get all GTD on you AmberV (in a good natured kind of way) if you are really doing something that trivial and mundane, it probably doesn't belong in your GTD system. :)


Bwana, you may not need reminders of mundane tasks, but some of us do!

Most of my work is mundane repeating tasks (I'm a housewife), and trust me, I need reminders to mop the floor, change the sheets and defrost the freezer!

But like Amber, I don't need a record of when I changed those sheets.

In KGTD, I'd periodically delete my old tasks. But it would be very nice to have a checkbox, "Don't keep old copy".

--Liz

[Wild Rye]

OK, repeating actions seem a little buggy, at least in Context View.

They don't seem to "check off." What's happening is that as soon as you check them, they reappear in the view.

It would be nice if you had a visual cue (ie a checkmark) and then the action would stay hidden until the next calendar day.

I know, I'm never satisfied.

[Craig]

OK, repeating actions seem a little buggy, at least in Context View.

They don't seem to "check off." What's happening is that as soon as you check them, they reappear in the view.

It would be nice if you had a visual cue (ie a checkmark) and then the action would stay hidden until the next calendar day.

I know, I'm never satisfied.

Would a start date help this?

[Wild Rye]

And it appears that having a daily repeating action at the top of a Project list prevents any subsequent action from becoming the Next Action.

[Wild Rye]

Would a start date help this?

Yes! Having a start date makes the item disappear off the list in Context View. Thanks.

But the second item down on the list still won't become a next action if the Project List is set up as a series.

[BwanaZulia]

Bwana, you may not need reminders of mundane tasks, but some of us do!

Most of my work is mundane repeating tasks (I'm a housewife), and trust me, I need reminders to mop the floor, change the sheets and defrost the freezer!

But like Amber, I don't need a record of when I changed those sheets.

In KGTD, I'd periodically delete my old tasks. But it would be very nice to have a checkbox, "Don't keep old copy".

--Liz

First of all, I was kidding. I have some VERY mundane tasks in my kGTD but again, I don't want OF to try to figure out which are Mundane and which are not and not keep the history.

Actually, maybe that is a good compromise. Daily repeating tasks don't archive will anything weekly or above does?

Maybe just an option in the inspector for the task as well (check box, archive task).

BZ

[LizPf]

Actually, maybe that is a good compromise. Daily repeating tasks don't archive will anything weekly or above does?

Maybe just an option in the inspector for the task as well (check box, archive task).


I think we need smileys on the list so I can tell when you're joking. No hu-hu.

1. not for me ... I have enough long period repeaters that they'd take over my archive.

B. This is what i was thinking ... a checkbox in the Repeating Inspector.


Oh,

Thank You, Omni Team!

--Liz

[AmberV]

Well an option is all I was asking for in the first place! :)

Edit: Hmm, what about Option-clicking the check box to have it alter the due dates and completion status in place, and regular clicking to generate a duplicate for records? Or even the other way around might be better for most (just how many archivists versus streamers do we have?). That way you could choose to record a duplicate if there were some relevant notes this time around that you'd like to save.

[coconino]

I'm with the keepers, but I'm also with those who use iCal (which I happen to like well enough) for repeating tasks. What interests me about the implementation in OF is the possibility of being able to repeat (or have templates for) an entire project with a set of actions. This would come in handy, for instance, for a regular publication with a large set of known actions and relatively slight organisational differences from issue to issue.

I've used my own kludged methods for doing exactly this sort of thing, but OF (especially with the proposed links to OmniPlan) holds out a lot of promise in this area.

[AmberV]

Coconino, the template idea was the first thing that popped into my head to test when I downloaded the SmileyFaceVersion! This ability, for some reason, has completely eluded even the best GTD programs to date. I too am quite excited at the potentials. I do a lot of things by procedure. Even though the content created with the procedure differs every time, the procedure is the same. To be able to instantly have a skeleton project is fantastic.

[HiramNetherlands]

The best idea in this thread, to my mind, is allowing the user to mark some repeating tasks to 'dissolve after completion'.

[yngtor]

Greetings,
I feel rather silly here, but I cannot seem to puzzle out how to set up a task to recur in OF. I've checked through the forums but simply not run across the "set this to that" information.
If you don't mind would you let me know how OF does this?
Thank you.
Ad Astra Per Aspera,
Kevin

[curt.clifton]

I feel rather silly here, but I cannot seem to puzzle out how to set up a task to recur in OF. I've checked through the forums but simply not run across the "set this to that" information.
If you don't mind would you let me know how OF does this?


Repeats are set in the Repeat inspector. Just select the project, action group, or action in OF. Then edit the repeat info in the repeat inspector. If it isn't visible choose Inspectors --> Repeat from the menu bar.

[Betsy]

Repeats are set in the Repeat inspector. Just select the project, action group, or action in OF. Then edit the repeat info in the repeat inspector. If it isn't visible choose Inspectors --> Repeat from the menu bar.

Ok, I did this (at least I think I did). I created a small project today that needs to be done 3 times each month. The I checked off repeat in the project inspector, but not in the individual actions. Then I performed the actions and checked them off.

I still have the original project with the original dates, with all the actions checked. Where's the new project? Will it not show up until the new start date?

I also tried clicking the Clean Up button, but that didn't do anything.

Being very new to this, I'm probably missing something obvious. :)

===========================================

OK, never mind. I read another old post and realized that I hadn't marked the project "Completed".

[Lizard]

right-click the project and change its status to "completed". Then you'll get a new project with a copy of all the actions but not checked off yet.

[wheeles]

right-click the project and change its status to "completed". Then you'll get a new project with a copy of all the actions but not checked off yet.
Is there any way to do that from the context view?

When you check off the last action of an action group, you have to know it's the final action and then switch views and mark the action group complete. That just doesn't feel the right.

I believe that either the action group name should then appear in the context view, for you to check off, or it should become complete when the last action in the group is complete. Otherwise, the whole repeating nature of the action group comes down to whether you remember to change views and mark that action group complete.

[Lucas]

The best idea in this thread, to my mind, is allowing the user to mark some repeating tasks to 'dissolve after completion'.

I know that peoples' needs are different, but isn't the ease of searching for the routine completed tasks and deleting them in a batch less costly than setting that flag for every routine action?

[curt.clifton]

Is there any way to do that from the context view?

When you check off the last action of an action group, you have to know it's the final action and then switch views and mark the action group complete. That just doesn't feel the right.

I believe that either the action group name should then appear in the context view, for you to check off, or it should become complete when the last action in the group is complete. Otherwise, the whole repeating nature of the action group comes down to whether you remember to change views and mark that action group complete.

This subject has been discussed extensively on the forums with little consensus. I've argued for having the action group name appear in the context view. I'm strongly opposed to auto-completing the parent, because that presumes that I've identified every next action in the group. Often times I only identify the next couple of actions, not every one. So auto-complete would create holes in the system for anyone without perfect planning.

The current behavior is that an action group with all children completed does not block subsequent tasks. This is a compromise that doesn't jibe with my intuition, but works OK. I wrote a script, available here (http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~clifton/software.html#VerifyNA), that I run in my daily review to identify action groups and projects that are missing next actions.

[wheeles]

The current behavior is that an action group with all children completed does not block subsequent tasks. This is a compromise that doesn't jibe with my intuition, but works OK. I wrote a script, available here (http://www.rose-hulman.edu/~clifton/software.html#VerifyNA), that I run in my daily review to identify action groups and projects that are missing next actions.
Thanks for pointing out the script, Curt. I suppose the way to bodge the behaviour of having the name of the action group appear in the context view is to add that as the last item of the group, or add a reminder to check off the action group as complete. It doesn't feel right to do this, but in the absence of a "proper" solution, it's an adequate compromise.