[billback]

OK - how do I set up repeating actions? I have the latest version, but can't figure it out. This is one of the hot features for me. TIA.

[AmberV]

First, make sure you have the Repeat Inspector open. It's really hard to miss it in the menu. Next, select a test action with a due date. The Inspector should be pretty self-explanatory. Fixed just means that even if you click it a few days late, it will still calculate the next date from the prior due date, rather than when you clicked it.

[billback]

:)) yeah - guess that was pretty hard to miss. I have a tendency to only look in the menu when I have to. I expected something on the task line. Might be something to look at in the future like the duration and calendar icons - have a repeat icon that I can click to show the inspector.

[Wild Rye]

The repeat icon would be nice in the display, so that you can differentiate a repeating action from a non-repeating action.

Make sure you set a start date on your repeating action, or it will behave strangely!

(Maybe OF should enter a default start date of Today for repeating actions?)

[AmberV]

My preferred way of handling it would be to allow repeat syntax right in the due column. I think I posted something along those lines in another thread. I'd love to be able to type "19 jun +3w" to mean: Do this on the 19th, and then every 3 weeks afterward. Then you don't waste a column, and can do everything with the keyboard.

Addenda: Good point, I think auto-filling the start date the same way it auto-fills it when you check it off would be a good idea, if the field is already blank. Having to fill out three fields is a bit cumbersome.

[billback]

Originally Posted by Wild Rye

Make sure you set a start date on your repeating action, or it will behave strangely!

Due date works as well instead of a start date.

[AmberV]

It will work once, but if you do not have both entered, the repeating action will consistently come up as a next action. If you have a sequence of actions that all happen after each other, that means the ones below it will never show up in context view. So you need a start date set to earlier in the day, and a due date set to later (though it seems to work fine if they are the same). That way, it will stay inactive until the start date arrives.

[curt.clifton]

I totally do not get how repeating actions are supposed to work.

Say I have an action "Mow the lawn". When I complete this task, I want it to disappear and not reappear on my schedule for 5 days. So I want the Start Date of the new "Mow the lawn" action to be 5 days after the completion of the previous task. (In Gantt charting terms this is a finish-start dependency with a 5 day lag.)

I've been trying to determine the current behavior to see if I can make it work. The gory details are below, but they seem somewhat arbitrary to me. Perhaps this is just because of a bug in the alpha, but it seems like it might also be due to copying a somewhat arbitrary design from kGTD. This posting is my attempt to figure out a less arbitrary approach.

Listing all the possibilities helps me understand the problem:

• There are three possible dates from which repeats can be calculated: the start date, due date, or completion date of the original task.
  
• There are two possible dates that can be set for the generated task: the start date and the due date.
  
• Finally there are two approaches to the date calculations: calculate the new start and due dates independently, or calculate just one of the new dates and then set the other to maintain the amount of time between start and due dates. The second option is the only one that maintains consistency over multiple repeats, so seems like the logical choice.

Thus, we have just six possible repeat patterns:

1. Start-Start: the start date of the new item is calculated from the start date of the original
   
2. Start-Due: the due date of the new item is calculated from the start date of the original
   
3. Completion-Start: the start date of the new item is calculated from the completion of the original
   
4. Completion-Due: the due date of the new item is calculated from the completion of the original
   
5. Due-Start: the start date of the new item is calculated from the due date of the original
   
6. Due-Due: the due date of the new item is calculated from the due date of the original
   

Currently fixed repeats with the start date set yield the Start-Start pattern with the wrong due date or else the Start-Due pattern with the wrong start date, since the start and due dates of the new action are the same. Non-fixed repeats yield the Completion-Due pattern with a bug when the start date is set. A fixed repeat with no dates set also uses the Completion-Due pattern, but since the due date is set for subsequent repeats this only happens on the first repeat. Finally a fixed repeat with just the due date set uses the Due-Due pattern.

The Completion-Start pattern, which I want, is not available, nor is the Due-Start pattern.

It seems like the Repeat inspector should have a drop-down list for choosing the repeat pattern instead of just a single "Fixed" checkbox. Something like:



Some of these options would be unavailable if a particular date wasn't set on the original action. For example, the Due-Start and Due-Due patterns don't make sense if no due date is set for the original action.

Thoughts?

The Gory Details

First the behavior if the start date (if any) for an action is in the past and the due date (if any) is in the future:

Original: start set, due not set
Repeat: every 5 days, not fixed
Result: Completion-Due with bug, new due date is set to 5 days from today, start date is wrong? (4 days from original start date)

Original: start not set, due not set
Repeat: every 5 days, not fixed
Result: Completion-Due, new due date is set to 5 days from today

Original: start not set, due set
Repeat: every 5 days, not fixed
Result: Completion-Due, new due date is set to 5 days from today

Original: start set, due set
Repeat: every 5 days, not fixed
Result: Completion-Due with bug, new due date is set to 5 days from today, start date is wrong? (4 days from original start date)


Original: start set, due not set
Repeat: every 5 days, fixed
Result: Start-Start or Start-Due with bug, new start and due date are set to 5 days from original start

Original: start not set, due not set
Repeat: every 5 days, fixed
Result: Completion-Due, new due date is set to 5 days from today

Original: start not set, due set
Repeat: every 5 days, fixed
Result: Due-Due, new due date is set to 5 days from original

Original: start set, due set
Repeat: every 5 days, fixed
Result: Start-Start or Start-Due with bug, new start and due date are set to 5 days from original start

There is one case that changes if the the due date is also in the past:

Original: start set, due set
Repeat: every 5 days, fixed
Result: Start-Start or Start-Due with skipped event and due date bug, new start and due date are wrong? (Both are set to SIX days from today or 10 days from original start date. This make some sense if we interpret the fixed occurance has having been missed.)

[kmarkley]

Here's another way to parse the logic for reapeating actions.

There are three meaningful ways that dates can be set for actions: start date only, due date only, or both. (If you set neither the start nor due dates for a repeating action, then I don't believe there is any good way for the software to interpret what you want. So I will ignore this for the moment.)

There are two ways to set a repeat interval: fixed or unfixed.

Thus there are 6 relevant cases, 5 of which I believe should have obvious results and the 6th is somewhat questionable.

Orig Action		New Start		New Due
------------		----------		---------
1. Start/Fixed		Start+Int		(None)
2. Due/Fixed		(None)			Due+Int
3. Both/Fixed		Start+Int		Due+Int
4. Start/Unfixed	Comp+Int		(None)
5. Due/Unfixed		(None)			Comp+Int
6. Both/Unfixed		Comp+Int		Comp+Int+Diff
					-OR-
			Comp+Int-Diff		Comp+Int


Where 'Int' is the interval, 'Comp' is the completion date, 
and 'Diff' is the difference between the start and due dates.

Personally, I think the second logic for #6 is preferable, but I suppose it could be argued either way.

Because the Good Omni is working the kinks out, I don't really know if this jives with their intentions or not.

Yes, kmarkley. These seem like reasonable updating schemes dependent on the start/due/fixed settings. I agree that the second logic for #6 seems preferable, but it's a tough call, and I think either would be acceptable.

Currently, for fixed repeating intervals and a start date earlier than the due date, OF seems to update both start and due dates to (start + int) when the action is marked completed. That doesn't seem right, since I will now lose my "heads up" for the action to appear on my radar a day or two (or whatever) in advance of the due date. In this case, your number 3 logic should apply, I would think.