Hans: do you have any thoughts or comments on this? Especially given that you are the main person working on it now your feedback is very valuable.
-David On Dec 13, 2007, at 9:06 AM, Jim Barrows wrote:
I'll second that.... I'll accept a bug in jira, but won't start on it until my current task is done all the time. This tracks that. In addition, how about a task state called waiting-on, and a reference to who or what the task is waiting on. At the very least, a reference to a party, a reference to another task, and a blank field for a description. This state should be able to entered into from almost any point. Thinking about the approval status... it seems to say approval is needed by more then one person. In the IT world, sometimes things need approved by more then person. In a manufacturing shop of a friend of mine, any changes over a certain amount need to be approved by him, the supervisor and the client. I think maybe the easiest way to handle approvals would be to provide an easy entry into the business rules for this task. Course, that could be true of any of these!On Dec 13, 2007 7:12 AM, Jacques Le Roux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:Maybe a new task status - In Progress (by performer) between- Accepted (by performer) - Completed (by performer)To note that the work is currently done, not in a wating state. Jacques ----- Message d'origine ----- De : "David E Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> À : <[email protected]> Envoyé : mercredi 12 décembre 2007 11:50 Objet : Task (WorkEffort) StatusesHans has started an effort to expand/refine task statuses in this issue:https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-1509I think this is complex enough that a mailing list discussion might behelpful. To define the point of this, as I see it, we're trying to create the most expansive set of statuses we can, in other all statuses thatanyone might need or want for a task. The status transitions can thentake into account that certain statuses don't have to be used, andthose can of course be added or removed during customization, or otherthings like SECA services can check constraints of course.Here's a pass at this (based on the current set of statuses, and someideas from Hans in the aforementioned issue): Roles: - client - analyst (task creator/writer) - task performer - peer of performer Statuses: - Needs Action (initial status, from task creator/writer (analyst)) - Approved (by client) - Sent (to task performer) - Accepted (by performer) - Completed (by performer) - Tested (scope of task, by performer or peer of performer) - Reviewed (in perspective of larger scope that task fits into, by task creator/writer (analyst)) - Changes Needed (failed to go to Tested or Reviewed) - Accepted (by client) - Declined (by performer) - Delegated (by performer) - On Hold (by client) - Cancelled (by client)That's a fairly quick first pass... anyone have any thoughts on otherroles or statuses (ie steps in the process)? -David-- James A Barrows
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
