[henri]

I've become much more productive since using OmniFocus. A key power of the software is the ability to only see what you need to see at any particular juncture.

This could be enhanced dramatically

- if actions could be placed on hold (e.g. by giving them a start date of "some time", which could be later than all other dates. Thus they wouldn't show up as available.)

- if projects could be queued -- only make this project available after that project is done.

In other words, OF would gain in flexibility if projects and actions had some of each other's features.

[Lucas]

1) Can't you use an "on hold" context? I.e., a context with its status set to be On Hold?

2) What disadvantage to using e.g. parallel action groups in a sequential project?

[malisa]

Originally Posted by henri

- if actions could be placed on hold (e.g. by giving them a start date of "some time", which could be later than all other dates. Thus they wouldn't show up as available.)

Actions CAN have start dates in the future that make them show up when viewing remaining actions and not show up when viewing available actions.

I believe that this is the case independently of the start date of a project in the direction that you're speaking of. Meaning if the start date of a project is later than the start date of an action (which I couldn't imagine a case for), I don't know...but if the start date of a project is prior to the start date of any action within the project, and the start date of the action is in the future, it will not show (given your view bar is set that way.)

[henri]

Originally Posted by Lucas

1) Can't you use an "on hold" context? I.e., a context with its status set to be On Hold?

2) What disadvantage to using e.g. parallel action groups in a sequential project?

1) I didn't know contexts could be on hold. Maybe better than nothing, but you lose the actual context info.

2) I can do that, and in fact I used to do that more. I no longer remember what the disadvantage was, but at some point I realized it was better to have projects actually be projects. Maybe the fact that projects can be put on hold!

[henri]

Originally Posted by malisa

Actions CAN have start dates in the future that make them show up when viewing remaining actions and not show up when viewing available actions.

Yes, of course, and I use that all the time. But you have to choose an actual date, e.g. in a month or in a year or whatever. Inevitably, that time comes and the action becomes available. I guess I could say "in ten years", figuring I won't be using this software in ten years.

I would prefer a "some day" date to use for that. For one thing it would be easier to review all "some day, maybe" actions once in a while.

[CorgiGirl]

Originally Posted by henri

I
- if projects could be queued -- only make this project available after that project is done.

Hi Henri

I have run into this scenario a lot myself. I have many projects that are inter-related, and one project is often dependent on another project being completed first. I also have projects that include many groups of actions. Some of the actions can be worked on, others are waiting for something else to be completed from another project before I can start on them.

It would be great to be somehow automate this... adding in a link of some sort to another project or action - when that is completed, the project or action group or action becomes available. That would be a dream come true :)

I do use the sequential grouping as often as possible, but of course that doesn't address these "cross-project needs." Dividing up the projects to handle this is also counter-intuitive as well., and when you have MANY projects like I do - dividing makes a big mess ;)

Has anyone figured out a way to handle this? I put projects on hold and add notes to the main project field just so I don't have to mentally process the needed sequence of events too often.