You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Hans Bakker <ma...@antwebsystems.com> on 2007/12/15 09:27:54 UTC
Re: Task (WorkEffort) Statuses, another view
I thought more about it and like to present a different approach for the
status on a task.
To allow for many approval authorities:
Anybody who need to approve the task will be a performer with a
appropriate roleTypeId
the status on a task is largely system controlled (1-4):
1: unassigned -> the task has no performers
2: assigned -> the task has one or more performers
3. in-progress -> at least one performer has registered
time on the task
4. completed -> all attached performers have set their
status to completed
5. onHold -> the projectmanager can set this status and
can be set back to status 1-3
6. cancelled -> again can be set by the projectmanager
Internally in the system the status is as follows:
1. created (further specified by the system as stated above)
2. completed
3. cancelled
4. onhold
what is the opinion of the community?
Regards,
Hans
Re: Task (WorkEffort) Statuses, any further comments?
Posted by Hans Bakker <ma...@antwebsystems.com>.
Can I ask the community to check the last project Task status proposal?
If there are no further comments i will implement the proposal below in
a couple of days in the special component 'project manager'
The final proposal about the project task status was:
The status on a task is largely system controlled (1-4) and user controlled (5-6):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1: unassigned -> the task has no performers and has not started.
2: assigned -> the task has one or more performers but has still not started
3. in-progress -> at least one performer has registered, the task is started
time on the task
4. completed -> all attached performers have set their assign
status to completed
5. onHold -> the projectmanager can set this status and
can be set back to status 1-3
6. cancelled -> again can be set by the projectmanager
The status of the assignment of a party to the task is manual
controlled:
-------------------------------------------------------------
1. assigned -> the task is assigned to the party with
from/thru dates to show when active
2. completed -> the party has done his part (work,approval,
test etc) on the task and has indicated he is ready.
--
http://Antwebsystems.com : OFBiz Quality support for competitive rates.
Re: Task (WorkEffort) Statuses, another view
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
I like it, though maybe I would prefer labelling onHold to reviewing.
No end task status (resolved, closed)? Is it managed at the project or phase level ?
Jacques
De : "Hans Bakker" <ma...@antwebsystems.com>
> I thought more about it and like to present a different approach for the
> status on a task.
>
> To allow for many approval authorities:
> Anybody who need to approve the task will be a performer with a
> appropriate roleTypeId
>
> the status on a task is largely system controlled (1-4):
>
> 1: unassigned -> the task has no performers
> 2: assigned -> the task has one or more performers
> 3. in-progress -> at least one performer has registered
> time on the task
> 4. completed -> all attached performers have set their
> status to completed
> 5. onHold -> the projectmanager can set this status and
> can be set back to status 1-3
> 6. cancelled -> again can be set by the projectmanager
>
> Internally in the system the status is as follows:
> 1. created (further specified by the system as stated above)
> 2. completed
> 3. cancelled
> 4. onhold
>
> what is the opinion of the community?
>
> Regards,
> Hans
>