More than one OmniFocus database?

[Roger Barre]

Is there any way to have more than one OmniFocus database? I have two different projects I'm managing, and each has a large number of custom-created Contexts. I don't need to use - or even see - all the contexts from one project when I'm working in the other, and having two separate *.ofocus files would help that.

/rb

[sprugman]

Why not create a top level context for each project, and then use "focus" to well, focus? If you set up a few perspectives you should be able to pretty effectively hide what you don't want to see.

(To answer your question, I'm pretty sure you can have multiple files -- double-clicking in the finder will open them.)

[Lizard]

While it's technically possible to have multiple files (this is more of a back door we opened to make our testing easier), we really encourage users to put everything in one database. As sprugman says, try out the 'focus' feature.

[Roger Barre]

Thanks. The reason I don't want to use Focus is because the drop-down Context lists reveals all the contexts for the other set of projects. I'm trying to use OF in a different way than strict GTD, and having multiple files will make this a lot more convenient.

[sprugman]

Setting the context filter to Active might help. Haven't done enough testing to know for sure. Seems like maybe it doesn't fully obey the "focus" settings. If that's the case, that seems like a bug.

[iNik]

I really think multiple files should be kept around. Yes, the easy "just open the database" model has a real usability advantage, but having the option of multiple databases opens up a lot of new opportunities for users.

For myself, I have two computers (home and work) and am running OF on each. I just back up the database (using the built-in backup feature) to my iDisk, and then I can access the DB (effectively read-only -- no changes will sync back) from either machine.

[Journey]

I think OF should allow multiple files. There are so many scenarios in which this would be helpful. Just one that comes to mind is that more than one person may be using the computer, and would want a separate file. It would be silly to think that more than one person should keep their data with another person's and use a perspective or contexts to differentiate between them.

Also, some people like to keep work distinctly separate from home activities. That's a valid choice, and therefore it makes sense that they have separate files for each.

[jasong]

more than one person may be using the computer, and would want a separate file. It would be silly to think that more than one person should keep their data with another person's and use a perspective or contexts to differentiate between them.

Mac OS X is a multi-user system. If you have more than one person using the computer, there's very little reason to not have separate user accounts.

[al_f]

Also, some people like to keep work distinctly separate from home activities. That's a valid choice, and therefore it makes sense that they have separate files for each.

Why not just make a "work" and a "home" folder at the top level in planning view and focus on one or the other?

[Journey]

Mac OS X is a multi-user system. If you have more than one person using the computer, there's very little reason to not have separate user accounts.

A husband and wife might want the same settings, short cuts, etc. There is no reason why software should force someone to set up separate accounts. Maybe they leave the computer on all day and use it as needed. Maybe the parents have one account and the kids another. There are other reasons why more than one OF database / file may be useful -- as previously mentioned, work vs. home is just one of the other ones.

[jasong]

It certainly would be nice for OF to have the ability to share various configuration settings easily (you can do it today by copying various preferences files).

There are better ways of achieving the goal of shared resources other than treating the system as a single-user machine from 1999. Some preferences might be the same, but a whole host of others will be different.

Do the husband-and-wife really want to share their bookmarks? Their email application?

I could go on about this, but I'm officially way off topic.

[Journey]

Do the husband-and-wife really want to share their bookmarks? Their email application?

It depends on the husband and wife. Some, or many, do share the same logon because they are happy just to get the darn computer to work much less know how to set up separate logons. It's not exactly fun to have to configure things more than once, like e-mail servers, especially to the average user (and especially to the average user of a Mac).

[jasong]

It depends on the husband and wife. Some, or many, do share the same logon because they are happy just to get the darn computer to work much less know how to set up separate logons. It's not exactly fun to have to configure things more than once, like e-mail servers, especially to the average user (and especially to the average user of a Mac).

That's why they have wonderful sons and daughters!