-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 322
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[TW-150] Create recurrences based on end dates in addition to due dates #203
Comments
Migrated metadata:
|
Cory Donnelly on 2010-08-15T08:49:56Z says: I'm finding that more and more of my obligations are best modeled using this period-dependent (versus due date dependent) type of recurrence:
Implementing this means that:
|
Paul Beckingham on 2010-08-15T08:55:58Z says: I think you've found a new species of recurrence. It is similar to the current species, but the subsequent task is only scheduled when the first is dismissed. RFC? |
Cory Donnelly on 2010-08-15T12:21:48Z says: Paul Beckingham wrote:
Agreed, I'm working on rfc32-recurrences.txt which discusses features #448 and #456. |
Federico Hernandez on 2010-08-15T14:56:25Z says: Paul, at some point there was a discussion about these type of recurrances, IIRC. But I don't know if we did that via email or on IRC. would be useful for you, Cory, if we could dig it up. |
John Florian on 2010-08-22T11:25:28Z says: This is functionality that has great interest to me as well. I have about an equal split of tasks of the "normal kind" and those that are preventive maintenance. Oil changes are definitely preventive and as stated above need to essentially be rescheduled upon completion of the most recent. Some are harder to pin down. Consider my task for buying and adding salt to the water softener. I've got a solid calculation down for the usage rate and can accurately predict when it'll be needed (at the latest). Our standard recurrence model works perfectly so long as I replenish the salt before the due date. After that the schedule is permanently slipped. So I'm not sure if this is something that should be fixed in stone when the task is created. Perhaps task could ask what to do when an ID is completed. Maybe task does something special just because it is after the due date. Thoughts? |
Daniel Shahaf on 2015-10-19T01:15:59Z says: Is this a duplicate of TW-1314 and TW-235? |
Paul Beckingham on 2015-10-19T04:48:49Z says: Yes, duplicates - thanks. Closed the others, keeping the original. |
Scott Kostyshak on 2016-04-29T06:36:54Z says: Are TW-1774 and TW-1751 both duplicates of this one? |
Seems like https://github.com/JensErat/task-relative-recur helps with this use case? |
Use `dirs-next` instead of `dirs`
Cory Donnelly on 2010-07-28T17:24:45Z says:
Sometimes the only concern a user has about a scheduled recurring task is that it shouldn't be sooner than x number of days since the last occurrence was completed. Consider the current recurrence scheme, based on due date:
Now, if the user were to call his or her mom half a month early, then the next recurrence wouldn't be for another 1.5 months.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: