Quote:
Originally Posted by macula
Utterly counterintuitive and clunky.
|
I would respectfully submit that the previous behavior seemed equally counterintuitive and clunky to a large group of people. While you don't personally agree with this change, it does help that other group of customers.
I would also respectfully submit that putting an action group into an on-hold context didn't put the children on hold in 1.7.x, either. I know your preference is that we leave things the way they were in 1.7.x, but the change we're making in 1.8 is a red herring here. :-)
I'm not dismissing your concerns, of course! If you can help us find solutions to any problems the 1.8 workflow doesn't address, that will help everyone. We've gotten a lot of feedback over the years from folks that don't understand or like the way action groups were operating in previous versions; we can't ignore that.
That all said, does the start date solution Bill offered work sufficiently well for your purposes?