pin...@iro.umontreal.ca (François Pinard) writes: > Bernt Hansen <be...@norang.ca> writes: > >> pin...@iro.umontreal.ca (François Pinard) writes: > >>> todo-dependencies should likely never be enforced for repeated >>> entries, even if enforced otherwise, as enforcing for repetitions >>> with the current Org mechanics has no meaning, at least as I >>> undestand Org so far. > >> You can set a NOBLOCKING property to t to skip the dependency check for >> repeated tasks. > >> * TODO Some Repeating Task >> SCHEDULED: <2011-12-16 Fri 15:30 ++1w> >> :PROPERTY: >> :NOBLOCKING: t >> :END: > > Thanks for the hint, Bernt. I'll use it for now. > > I still think this is a work around a real problem, which would ideally > be corrected. Regardless of blocking being configured or not for > non-repeating tasks, repeated tasks should never be blocked, shouldn't > they? > > François
Hi François, I think the answer to that question is "it depends". I think there is a way to make check boxes block tasks too (but I've never used it) and in conjunction with resetting all of the checkboxes to unchecked you probably don't want to do that accidentally half way through your list of done items. I think this preference is very much workflow driven and shouldn't be globally assigned for everyone. I'm fine with an option that selects the behaviour globally so you can customize it the way you like. It would be nice if subtasks (that are DONE) get automatically moved back to TODO when the parent repeating task is marked DONE (and goes back to TODO). It's just not an itch anyone has scratched yet. If repeating tasks behaved this way (in the future) I think keeping the blocking functionality for repeating tasks makes sense. Regards, Bernt
