| Welcome! | English (US)  |
- Home
- Learn More
- Signup (Free!)
- Blog
- Help
| Welcome! | English (US) |
It would be nice to mark (link?) some tasks as dependent on another task being completed.
Posted at 9:03pm on February 9, 2007
Perhaps tasks that are waiting for another task to be finished could be dimmed. When all the prerequisite tasks are finished, the the task would turn the normal font again.
Posted at 9:07pm on February 9, 2007
Mmm, yes please. This would be really useful, and generate lots of GTD love.
If you enable any drag and drop, then you could implement this as dragging a task onto the prerequisite one, and having a drop zone in the center or right that made it a child. You could visually show the result by indenting the dependent task.
Posted at 10:07pm on February 14, 2007
Michael is right, and could be a good improvement in RTM features. Specially because could be added another functionality...
I use RTM mainly for:
1. Calendar (events/meetings)
2. To do (no due tasks)
And if you implement this feature could be an interesting and powerfull Project manager tool.
I use RTM for GTD and I work in project management. This tool could be very differentiating from other calendar/task tools. RTM is intuitive I hope this feature comes very soon, Emily help us.
Posted at 3:51pm on February 15, 2007
Having nested tasks would be a great addition. The ability to indent a task to become a sub task is another method of making this work.
Posted at 7:32pm on March 5, 2007
says:The ability to have nested/dependent tasks would greatly improve an already great RTM!
Posted at 11:26am on March 6, 2007
Great idea, it becomes annoying having dependent tasks showing up around the parent task...it gets confusing when you have a lot of them.
Posted at 10:30pm on March 7, 2007
*hands raised* Yes. I would like this as well. It'll be a great function.
Posted at 8:26am on March 14, 2007
this would be awesome if they were collapsible or something
Posted at 9:58am on March 15, 2007
Boy, would I love this!
Posted at 1:18am on March 22, 2007
I would definitely use this feature - running multiple projects concurrently, the tag/smart list approach doesn't help with dependencies.
Posted at 12:34am on March 26, 2007
I second the request - I would even consider giving up software I've paid for.
Anyway, I don't think we'll see this anytime soon.
Posted at 10:09pm on March 26, 2007
No doubt, this would be a very useful addition!
Posted at 6:36pm on March 29, 2007
I would still love to have this ability.
Posted at 4:30pm on April 2, 2007
I'm just playing with this, and was trying to use tags and then smart lists to keep track of projects, in hopes of avoiding having a list for every project. But saved smartlists just become another list tab, defeating the whole idea.
So yes, some kind, any kind of sub list, witch dependancies, would be wonderful!
Posted at 10:59pm on April 5, 2007
says:I would love this also. IMHO it's a big flaw in the GTD system in general.
It's all very well having "call Sue re: suitable dates" be the next step to planning a birthday party to get you started, but once you've done that you have to immediately go back to the project plan to see what's next. Or you could wait until the weekly review to discover that you then need to "Call Bob the Clown to see if he's available those dates" by which time he's been booked by someone else. I'm being pedantic but you get the idea.
I think what a lot of us are asking for is a simple project planner with outlining and dependencies feeds into the "todo now" list as items become relevant.
Really appreciate if anyone has any tips on ways or tool for achieving this. I've taken to annotating tasks to remind me that, when done, there's another next action to be set (a * or a [hint] at the end of the title)
Posted at 3:26pm on April 23, 2007
This would be a great feature. Maybe some kind of "task map" like (rubbish) Microsoft Project uses?
Posted at 8:11pm on April 23, 2007
says:Yes, great idea.
Posted at 12:28pm on April 27, 2007
sounds good to me
Posted at 3:44pm on April 28, 2007
This feature has my vote, as well.
Posted at 6:49am on May 8, 2007
Great idea as i'm also trying to use RTM as project management tool
Posted at 1:19pm on May 8, 2007
It is a great idea to include a sub-task list, or dependent task in RTM. After that RTM can be a really strong GTD tool.
Posted at 11:52am on May 10, 2007
Great idea. My two thumbs are up.
Posted at 12:49pm on May 10, 2007
If you complete the task, the task that was dependant on should take its place
[And note, dependancies are different to sub-tasks. Technically.]
[Note 2: i want them both... :0 ]
Posted at 12:49pm on May 10, 2007
says:Exactly as benpage26 said - sub-tasks are different from dependencies, and I want them both too (but I want sub-tasks more than anything else). I understand (according to comments elsewhere) that this might be "against the GTD system", or something of the sort, but since strict followers of GTD can always just ignore such features, it would be extremely useful for most of us without getting in the way of others.
Right now this greatly limits the usefulness of RTM for me - but since most of the others don't allow it either, I guess I will stick with RTM for now (btw, todoist.com does implement this sub-tasks, but I tend to dislike the interface there; plus, it's a one-man side-project with no export functionality, so I wouldn't trust it with my life)
Posted at 9:02pm on May 10, 2007
I would find the ability to make some tasks dependent on others INCREDIBLY useful.
I understand that Emily and co at RTM are being cautious not to complicate the user interface. However I think this feature could be immensely powerful yet intuitive.
Perhaps it could be implemented like this:
1) A new tab in the right-hand box (alongside Task and Notes) called "Depends" or "Requires". Alternatively just a new property in the Task tab.
2) In this tab/property, a method of selecting (multiple) tasks that the current task(s) depends on. I think the best way would be a variation on the way you add tags to a task: you begin to type, and a list of tasks (and perhaps tags) that contain the letter sequence you've typed appears in the drop down list. A newline would be used to separate different tasks.
3) Either by default all tasks could be listed, even those that depend on another incomplete task, but distinguishable visually (perhaps they are a lighter gray), or else they are normally not visible until active. Either way, a new search operator would allow filtering out those tasks that depend on an incomplete task.
I feel that having this in a new tab like "Requires" would help those with no concept of dependencies just ignore the whole thing.
As a side note, perhaps this new Requires tab could eventually contain other properties that would be needed before the task became active, ie. at a certain date.
Posted at 4:47pm on May 19, 2007
Yes, yes both my hand are up for this one. Sooooo useful. Please, please can we have this.
Posted at 6:30pm on May 19, 2007
great ideas!
as far as for a dependent task system, the indent idea seems to make the most sense to me. i like that you would be able to see all the dependent tasks grouped together under the foremost task. then when that task is done, the next task in line takes its place.
yeah, sub-task and dependency are different. i think it's that sub-tasks are part of a 'project' or ultimate goal, while dependencies aren't necessarily part of a goal. i think.
the indent idea might not work for sub-tasks (at least, not in the same way) only because there might be more than one task you can do at a time for that 'project.'
in case you want to know, this is how i handle projects and sub-tasks:
i made a tab called 'projects' which aren't tasks in themselves, but all their associated tasks are in another tab i called 'next action' (as part of the gtd system). all these next actions have a note referring to which project they are associated with.
Posted at 11:38pm on May 23, 2007
This would be a very good feature of RTM. I'd love it. It's already great, but this would make it even better!
Posted at 8:26pm on May 26, 2007
Gets my vote too - in fact it is almost essential - no web based system I have found so far does this properly. IMO in the overview (and gadget/calendar views) there is no point seeing a task that depends on another task until that task is marked as completed. Obviously in main RTM you need to be able to see them in order to be able to edit them.
Posted at 5:48pm on May 28, 2007
My thumbs up on this feature too...it would make RTM the ultimate tool :)
Posted at 4:09pm on June 2, 2007
says:This gets my vote as well.
As people noted above, you need to have both dependencies and sub-tasks--they're different things.
Additionally, if you could show the to-do list in a Gatt diagram, I think this would be a great product management tool--I would use it for that. Gatt diagrams are the best way to spot bottlenecks, as well as motivating a team (or you) to get the projects done--better than a to-do list, I think, because you get to see progress towards a goal.
Posted at 1:48am on June 3, 2007
says:One more vote. While I believe this is addressed in GTD (the book) through the weekly review it would be handy to have an easy way to get back to the parent project for Actions. Alternatively or additionally, it may be useful to implement the 'next action' approach where a single trigger completes this action and then either takes you back to the parent task (project) for review or opens a new task dialog so that the next action may be setup.
Posted at 1:09am on June 4, 2007
says:would love to see task dependencies (I just spent 10 minutes trying to figure out how to do it)
Posted at 12:01am on June 7, 2007
Both hands up for me, too. I just popped over here to suggest it.
I like the "Requires" field idea, where you link the dependent task to an existing task, and where it doesn't show up at all on the Overview, and shows up only tucked away under an explodable [+] icon on the most-current task even within the lists view.
But rather than suggest to the RTM team that they should try to implement task maps or Gantt charts or anything... just dependent tasks would make a huge difference. Don't get distracted by frills.
If they then added export of that task's tree (say by emailing it to you in some consistent plaintext .csv-style format) then turning it into whatever graphical form can be done rapidly by those who want to do so, without dragging on the RTM team's time. Gantt charts are cool, but 99% of folks don't need 'em and can't much benefit from 'em.
Posted at 5:03pm on June 7, 2007
This would make getting things done so much faster. Most of my tasks have something to do with each other, and dependencies are very strong in my lists. I would love to be able to manipulate items with other items' status.
Posted at 3:59am on June 8, 2007
fully second the idea
Posted at 9:37am on June 9, 2007
I would like to see both subtasks and dependent tasks.
Especially if multiple tasks could depend on a single task. For example, tasks which cannot proceed until additional server space is installed.
Posted at 4:27pm on June 25, 2007
Yes, dependent tasks, or tasks in a parent child relationship. Also the ability to sequence the tasks.
Posted at 7:13pm on July 6, 2007
says:Dependent tasks would just be absolutely wonderful!!!
One of my lists is just a to do list of tasks for rebuilding a wall in our garden. But everything is dependent. Move the cement to the back garden on Monday and then start laying bricks on Tuesday. Uh Oh. It rained on Monday. I postpone Monday's task. But Tuesday's task hasn't moved. I have to manually go through each task down the list and pospone them...
The kids' homework: Buy the book on Monday. Read the book on Tuesday and Wednesday. Do the book report on Thursday. Uh Oh. We couldn't get the book on Monday but rather Wednesday. Postpone Monday's task and everything else would move along. Wonderful!
I could go on...
You get the idea. This could be so much easier to use and manage than a full-blown Project Management System while still being multi-user and powerful.
What a great idea!!!
Posted at 1:48pm on July 7, 2007
says:Would still love to have this. At least two forum topic posts about this very subject.
Posted at 6:17pm on July 7, 2007
Emily and co.: At the risk of annoying you further about this topic, I'll add my request. *Please* consider dependent tasks. I would even pay for RTM if it had this feature.
Posted at 10:33pm on July 28, 2007
The ability to have a task hierarchy or nested relationships or 'depends on' or 'for' fields would make RTM absolutely fantastic!
Posted at 10:25pm on August 13, 2007
Both dependent and sub tasks are much needed additions which i would use regularly.
Posted at 10:02am on August 14, 2007
I've wanted this functionality for a long time. I hope we do see it at some point!
Posted at 3:35pm on August 15, 2007
Hi RTM team,
I just read the announcement on the RTM Pro accounts. I think they're a good idea, and a fine price.
But the lack of dependent tasks (or something similar) has held me back from using RTM to manage everything in my daily life. I use the GTD system, and without dependent tasks (or whatever) I think it is too inefficient to manage the various little "projects" we always have on the go.
As don.march says above, I would definitely pay to have this feature!
Posted at 10:52am on August 20, 2007
says:Concur!
Posted at 10:54pm on August 23, 2007
says:It hasn't been mentioned yet, but www.hiveminder.com does this very thing--allows you to create "but first" ..."and then" tasks to chain the dependencies of tasks together. I LOVE the idea; I don't like how HM does it (and many other things), however--which is why I'm sticking with RTM.
HM's "Braindump" feature is really cool too--as suggested elsewhere, it's a few-lined field available on home screen that parses multi-task entries like:
remember the milk @errands p-food !personal
get a cappuccino @eerrands p-food !personal @jones
Posted at 11:33am on August 25, 2007
says:I like the way that foury describes something similar in another post, located here.
"Expressions that define ... relationships between two or more tasks"
Posted at 5:53pm on August 25, 2007
says:I love the idea!
Posted at 8:22pm on August 25, 2007
says:Apparently I haven't yet put my vote on this one. This would be awesome.
Ange.
Posted at 11:39pm on August 25, 2007
yea, I logged in to propose this idea too
Posted at 6:28pm on August 26, 2007
I concur with my colleagues – please RTM let us know when this upgrade is integrated.
Posted at 4:14pm on August 29, 2007
While it would solve a lot of hackish workarounds, the actual implementation is very problematic.
I was having a think about it (have a similar problem here) and involves dividing the list into two, one of which is initially empty.
There a two buttons, one to add to the empty list and one to remove from the list. There are other buttons to rearrange within that list.
That is a lot of work. Then you need a way of displaying the dependant tasks. My initial idea would be to indent the list below the initial task and remove the checkbox and the border (or make it a light grey?).
Then there is the testing involved to make sure there isn't any unexpected effects from all the changes required.
There is a lot of work involved here. I'd rather have a couple of smaller features added first (date arithmetic and start date being two simpler choices) than a very long pause between updates.
Posted at 9:30am on August 30, 2007
says:I also think this would be a good feature.
Posted at 10:12pm on September 22, 2007
Here's my vote! Dependent tasks would be extremely useful to me. I would probably be convinced to pay for pro if it were implemented as a pro feature.
Posted at 9:30pm on September 25, 2007
says:Graham,
My idea of dependent tasks implementation is a little different.
I think of them as a developing on the hide untill feature often also suggested. Instead of hiding a task untill a date (trigger:date), you hide untill another task completion. For that there could simply be a new task property: Trigger.
You could input a date at the trigger field, and that would be when the task would show up. Actually, that implementation could also be a semi-hack for start dates (we all know sticky due dates are the only real way!)
For dependent tasks, the trigger field would have an identifier (like a tag) that would be shared with the task that triggers it. In that way one task could also trigger two or more, or one single task could only be triggered when a handful of tasks were completed. Could get complex, but also very flexible and powerful.
It's something that can be done through tags, but gets very hackish.
Posted at 9:58pm on September 25, 2007
says:I do not post this as a comment on any individual post or commenter here, but this blog post sure made me think of the discussions here:
http://www.37signals.com/svn/posts/609-ill-buy-if
Makes me glad I am not a developer, frankly.
Posted at 11:08pm on September 25, 2007
@bzpilman: You method is better than mine, and less work to implement.
Posted at 8:23am on September 26, 2007
@ranbarton
I certainly agree with the sentiments of the post you linked to. And indeed, the RTM team should bear in mind that someone saying "I'll upgrade to pro if feature x is added" won't necessarily hold true.
But this thread has been going for more than 7 months, and well before pro was introduced at RTM. So even if such comments are ignored, you can see many, many people want this feature without even the mention of upgrade to a pro account.
For me personally, I genuinely love so much about RTM. I use it for little lists. But I rely on a straightforward system of todo lists to keep the many aspects of my life running smoothly.
Without a dependent tasks implementation, or something similar, I genuinely can't move my todo lists system to RTM. I've tried, and it just ends up an enormous mess of crazy tags.
It stops being straightforward to use and therefore I lose one of the biggest advantages RTM has over competing services.
Posted at 1:11pm on September 26, 2007
I really like the idea of dependent or sub-tasks - thus creating a project task. Of course the implementation should be in keeping with the look and feel and simplicity of RTM.
Posted at 5:37pm on September 26, 2007
Especially, in the light of what ranbarton said, I'm beginning to think that what the RTM team should do is build a project management app from scratch and charge for it, like what the 37signals team did. It could sort of be built on the RTM interface principles, but it would have dependent tasks, task hierarchies, ' hide/until' and all these project management features baked right in,instead of bolted unto the RTM interface, which is what folks seem to be asking for.
Count me too as being quite cynical that all this stuff is " easily programmable" as if the RTM team could throw it together in a single afternoon.
Posted at 3:13am on September 28, 2007
says:Oh no... please don't!
There are many online project management systems out there. If that's what we wanted then that's where we'd be. I use a couple of them for specific projects already.
I think what everyone's saying here is that they want to keep the simplicity and flexilibity of RTM with the "simple" addition of the possibility of making tasks dependant on a previous task.
We do not want a full-blown PMS... we just want to add one new feature here.
Posted at 4:30pm on October 3, 2007
Heh, who we... white man?
Everyone wants just one simple addition that will make the RTM interface perfect.- except its generally a different addition, based on who you ask.
Think what the interface would look like if ALL those "simple additions" were bolted on to RTM's interface.
You would get a bloated monstrosity.
The better idea IMO is to keep RTM as simple as possible and build a project management app for those who want to manage business projects.. which is why you need task hierarchies, dependent tasks, " hide Until' options, etc.
Face it, if all you need to do is run your basic daily to-dos, you don't really need all this stuff.
But if you want to run major projects, you need all that.
Posted at 11:12pm on October 3, 2007
says:I agree with dcefrance here. That's not saying I don't like your idea, carib, but I think it's completely separate and independent from this idea (dependent tasks).
Posted at 1:27am on October 5, 2007
"if all you need to do is run your basic daily to-dos, you don't really need all this stuff."
This is not the case for my situation. I don't think I am alone in requiring dependent tasks to be available for managing my personal todos.
Posted at 1:55pm on October 5, 2007
says:What justyn said.
Posted at 11:42pm on October 5, 2007
Of course, you will always find some situations in which having a dependent task option is helpful. Bu I ( and suspect most people) would not regard a dependent task option as NECESSARY in running their daily to-dos. Most of the time, the daily to-do list consists of either chores ( get haircut, clean room) which don't require the completion of a prior task, or various one-off tasks. I can imagine dependent task situations but not too often ( buy X bands tickets if they go on sale November 1, maybe), but I think they are rare for the average user.
They are, however, commonplace in project management situations, which is why I think they belong in a project management app.
Virtually the only online to do list manager that I know of that has a dependent task option ( Hiveminder) was built from the beginning as a business task management/project management app.
My point really is that there are many features that could be helpful for RTM users but if they were ALL implemented they would like screw up a great interface.
Posted at 12:19am on October 6, 2007
I need dependancies, and as a shared contact loving app I assume its the next step - perhaps my life needs a project management team but I'm always a step ahead in what I need to do.
Why keep it in my head? I can add it tp RTM but I currently have to add future tasks as p4 with a number. Then add this numbe rto current tasks and once complete take the number out of the future task and bounce to p3.
i.e.
buy cheese (1)
1 - make cheese sandwhich
Posted at 10:31pm on October 8, 2007
Sign me up for the vote for sub-tasks.
Posted at 9:21pm on October 10, 2007
says:There is an assumption here that dependent tasks and/or subtasks means business project management.
I use RTM for my personal AND business AND family tasks. ALL of them use dependent tasks.
For so many tasks there's a notion of find, buy, deliver, use:
Change the light bulb in the oven: 1. Find the oven manufacturer on the Internet or in the phone book. 2. Call the oven manufacturer and order the bulb; 3. Change the bulb in the oven
If it takes longer than foreseen for 1 or 2 then 3 has to move. It's a pain to have to find task 2 and task 3, within the myriad of lists and tasks we all have, to change the due dates because task 1 has moved.
This is true of so many different types of tasks that have absolutely nothing to do with professional and business use.
BUT if you are creating a version of the software called PRO, which I am already a client of, then these types of tasks are certainly a pre-requisite and not just a useful addition.
Posted at 9:44am on October 12, 2007
Maybe we (the users) should continue throwing out ideas about how dependencies and/or subtasks could be implemented, in case the developers are still trying to find a simple yet effective way to allow us to have this functionality. It does seem like it would be tricky to do, and that there would be a bunch of ways to do it, and a lot of testing required. (I'd love to volunteer to beta test!)
Even if there was some way for us to "less hackishly" implement our own customizable subtask or sequential task method, that would really, really help. Right now, I've just been using numbers and letters to preface the tasks, and I either review them sorted by task name or by date, depending on what aspect I need to reflect upon. (And all the tasks are repeating, so the due dates keep cycling around.)
Here's my example... Every week, my teaching "project" involves marking an assignment, and teaching a tutorial. Let M = marking subproject, and T = tutorial subproject.
All the following tasks are tagged: +teaching
tasks:
M1 - pick up unmarked assignments from professor
M2 - write up my solution
M3 - mark assignments
M4 - ensure my solution handout covers the difficulties the students had
M5 - return marked assignments to professor
T1 - prepare an interesting example related to the current class lessons
T2 - prepare some notes about the prior and upcoming homework assignments
T3 - type up lesson overview for myself
T4 - photocopy solution handouts and any supplementary material
T5 - attend tutorial
T6 - brainstorm ideas for next tutorial
What I noticed while setting this up was that my marking subproject steps really can work in sequence, while the tutorial subproject steps don't really matter on the sequence -- but they're numbered anyways to keep myself focused on the Next Action. I have seen to-do software that had an option to have sequencing turned on or off...
For other, smaller multi-part tasks (aka "projects") I find myself just using the Notes field for the steps, usually with the task itself having the name of the current step in the sequence. I just have to remember not to Complete the action, because I have to look up the next action in the note, and change the name of the task to reflect the new Next Action. But this is a heck of a lot easier than searching out the Next Action from a mess of other actions.
Anyways, I just wanted to share all that in case it helped the developers come up with a way to provide the functionality. Good luck Emily and Omar, I think I speak for all of us when I say that you've been doing great, and that we only want to see this wonderful piece of work becoming everything that it can!
Posted at 6:33pm on October 16, 2007
this post actually belongs in the Tips & tricks forum :-).
There are several very good tips on the same issue. to be honest, if you have a good name/numbering scheme, you don't really needs a subtask/dependent tasks software solution, although it would be helpful for many. Emily has pretty much said that it ain't happening, any time soon.
Posted at 12:05am on October 17, 2007
says:carib please point me to where Emily has said that it ain't happening. I would greatly appreciate getting a final decision on this from RTM. If the decision is "it ain't happening" that is most certainly their right. But I need to know.
If it ain't happening I'm going to have to move all of my tasks over to ToodleDo. I'm going to lose out on a certain number of features I've come to love (adding tasks by e-mail) but I'm going to gain subfolders and subtasks.
I'd hate to make the move after devoting so much time, energy and passion to RTM. But this has become a "deal breaker". If dependent tasks, or subtasks, are NEVER coming to RTM we need to know so as to make our own decisions as to where we want to invest the rest of our time and energy.
Posted at 9:15am on October 18, 2007
Emily:
As we've now provided several ways to organize tasks (tags, lists, and Smart Lists), we have no plans to introduce subtasks.
A workaround for subtasks might be to use lists and tags -- for example, I have a list named 'Shopping', and within that list I've tagged tasks with 'supermarket', 'mall', etc. I can then view tasks tagged with 'supermarket' in my 'Shopping' list, which helps to break down the list.
Hope this helps!
Posted at 12:53am on January 28, 2006
============================================
This seems fairly clear, and she repeated something like this recently, saying that it would trying to introduce subtasks would cause significant changes to the interface- as indeed it would. I'm not even a programmer, and i can see this.
Despite the frequent requests for subtasks, I can see why RTM would be reluctant to change the interface that has made it ( according to lifehacker) the most popular to do list manager on the Net.
I just don't think subtasks are going to happen. Sorry.
Posted at 12:37am on October 19, 2007
says:Carib,
Thanks for the confirmation.
I agree that I would not want to touch the outstanding RTM interface. It's one of the major reasons I'm here along with so many others.
However I do feel that independent tasks could be added without huge modifications to the current interface. There are many possibilities including some already mentioned here in the Forums.
We already have an Overview tab, a Tasks tab, a Locations tab and so on. Dependent tasks, subtasks and/or folders could easily be added as another view on the same dataset.
I think many of bzpilman's ideas are an excellent implementation and they only require 2 new fields. Those 2 fields could appear in the right-hand column where tags and keys appear at the moment without taking too much away from the current interface.
It could be done. Many users want it. The question therefore is basically does Emily not want to add this functionality at all to the system or have they just not found a method (yet) that they feel should be applicable?
Posted at 7:39am on October 19, 2007
Well, I'm not a programmer, but my guess
is that if subtasks and dependencies were simple, they would be more widely offered.
As it is, whenever they are offered, its usually part of an expensive business solution (Microsoft Project, for example). when its offered online its generally part of a paid plan costing $60 a year and more.
In light of this you might want to rethink your idea that subtasks are easily implemented. I've looked at bazilman's suggestions, and while it may look promising, i have a feeling that there is a lot of devil in those details. Plainly, the RTM team feels so also.
Put another way, what we have now is a flat hierarchy offering a feature set similar to the Outlook tasks module. What you want is something that would look more like Microsoft Project or Access-a multi-level, relational database thingy.
Posted at 12:19pm on October 19, 2007
says:A long time ago (actually not that long ago) there where Kremlin watchers, trying to guess what might happen in the Soviet Union based on who where present at the parades on the Red Square, and in what order. Now we have RTM-watchers trying to guess what new features might appear in RTM (and what might not appear ;-)
Have a nice weekend!
Posted at 1:50pm on October 19, 2007
Dependencies and sub-tasks are two different things.
A dependency is when something requires the completion of another item before another can be started.
A sub-task is a granular part of a larger object. RTM already has sub-tasks: A list with several related items in it.
G.
Posted at 2:06pm on October 19, 2007
I see some chance of dependent tasks. Anyone here knows how Hiveminder does it?
@graham.reeds :
Most of people asking for subtasks are really looking for RTM to morph into a version of Todoist-with RTM"s feature set and of course still free. And a pony :-)
Posted at 4:41pm on October 19, 2007
says:Dependent tasks and subtasks are the same thing.
A task could have only one subtask, and that would be the same as having a dependency on the subtask.
When one major task depends simultaneously on many other tasks, you have the concept of subtasks/projects. It's still the same dependency, but it nows depends on multiple subtasks.
Point me the difference, please.
Posted at 2:46am on October 20, 2007
Franky, I think the simplest way to handle dependent tasks is to simply NUMBER the tasks-which is the way grandma learned to bake a cake before there were any such things as computer software:-).
As the question of having to move tasks 2&3 if task 1 is postponed, well the multi edit feature in RTM makes that less painful. To get software to do that automatically, means looking at a major relational database solution, along the likes of Project and/or Access. You probably need to open your wallet and head on over to Base camp, etc. if you want an online solution. All those who are willing to pay $60 or more a year for that functionality, say aye ( listens to crickets for a while, then resumes).
For those who absolutely must organize their tasks in a hieracthical outline, well, I've a lot of sympathy for that . But lets not pretend we are talking about something simple.frankly, I think you have a big decision to make.
Posted at 6:00pm on October 21, 2007
says:First of all *I* am willing too pay for RTM as it is, and I have done so, and I am willing to pay more for more professional features. The first thing I mentioned when I became a Pro member was that Dependant tasks would be the perfect feature for Pro members and worth an investment.
On the one side people here are saying dependant tasks are only available as part of expensive project management systems. On the other hand people here are mentioning existing services where dependant tasks are available for free and work. I have been playing with Toodledo for a while now and I had looked at Hiveminder. I had never heard of Todoist before. I have signed up and am creating to-do lists at the moment. The point is not which is better. The point is that it can be done.
At the moment I find Todoist overly complicated as an interface and I'm worried what will happen to the program when the programmer finishes school. BUT it really does what I need and it really does it nicely. I'm going to be spending time there and here for some time until I get sick of going back and forth.
Either Todoist will add features like being able to e-mail todo items directly or RTM will add more professional features like dependant tasks... but some day I'll go with one and drop the other.
The fact is that dependant tasks are possible. They do not have to be part of an expensive project management system but rather a natural and simple extension to a To Do list. Other systems have implemented these features as part of their To Do system without creating a complex project management system and they realised that it was a natural part of a full-featured To Do system.
I repeat that I am willing to pay for this sort of additional feature as I believe it has value and will set RTM apart from the others. But... it could also go the other way and I will pay some other system for what I could have bought here... if it were available.
Posted at 9:48pm on October 23, 2007
A workaround-posted earlier
==================
i think the best thing to do is use a tree type outliner like TreeDB Notes and once you plan out your project, just copy/paste the tasks into rtm. You can use the general "project name' tag to ID the task, but you would look to the outliner to see where the task fits into the structure of the project
===============================
The idea is to use RTM as the front end to manage your current tasks. You simply create your current tasks ( Next Actions in GTD parlance) as items in RTM. When they are done, you review your project and add more from your outline. Your outline would detail all the various relationships between the tasks and you would look there to identify any dependencies.
For example , if your project is "Conquer Albania", you set up and outline the project off site. The first thing you might want to do is hire an army, but first you have to do recruitment. the next action might therefore be " Write catchy recruitment ad". You add that as an RTM task and tag it " Albania". You look to your outline to realize that " hiring an army" is dependent on writing a recruitment ad. And so on.
HTH
Posted at 12:54pm on October 24, 2007
says:Apparently there is a difference between subtasks and dependent tasks. In my opinion they are one and the same but in actual implementation they appear to be 2 different levels.
Both Todoist and Toodledo have subtasks and task folders. In this case a task can be made up of a group of subtasks in a particular order.
Oven Light Bulb
1. Call supplier and get references
2. Order light bulb
3. Replace light bulb in oven
That all sounds simple and what we want in that everything's in one place. If we could get this much out of RTM I would double my Pro payment!
Even those these are subtasks they are not dependent tasks. If I set task 1 as due today, task 2 as due tomorrow and task 3 as due in 10 days then... if I change task 2 to be due in 2 days task 3 does not move. There is no dependent link between task 3 and task 2. They are simply all subtasks part of a parent task.
I would obviously prefer to have dependent tasks. It would make management so much easier. But even the simple aspect of subtasks would make it much easier to reschedule the following tasks related to one specific task rather than scrolling and searching through lists of tasks to find any related tasks. I always miss out on at least one.
It can be done!
Posted at 9:50am on October 25, 2007
Well, Emily says no, but keep asking, I guess.
===================================
If I set task 1 as due today, task 2 as due tomorrow and task 3 as due in 10 days then... if I change task 2 to be due in 2 days task 3 does not move. There is no dependent link between task 3 and task 2. They are simply all subtasks part of a parent task.
I would obviously prefer to have dependent tasks. It would make management so much easier.
==========================
I really think that this isn't available, either online or off line, except as part of a pretty high end solution. If you find that at a low cost anywhere, let me know. I know it can be done, but it'll cost.
Posted at 6:09pm on October 25, 2007
I've been using the Notes to manage all kinds of things like subtasks, dependencies, next tasks, and tasks that I need to keep track of my progress towards completion.
Some examples:
* Some tasks have two notes: one titled DONE, and one titled TO DO. When I progress through the subtasks, the subtask gets moved from TO DO to DONE. This works for those times that the main task depends on the subtasks, and this works whether the subtasks must be completed in order or not. No numbering hacks required!
* When a task was discovered to be masquerading as a project, I added a note to it entitled BUT FIRST, and appended the task description with "(but first..)" to remind me that there's more to the task. I should of course review this task and see about putting it into some more serious Next Actions, but I don't have to yet, so I haven't.
* For some tasks, every bit of progress is worth keeping track of, even if its completion doesn't actually remove the task from my list. I set the task to "repeat after..." some time period, and the notes carry forward so I can review them when the task comes up again. I still get that satisfaction of marking it complete, but I also track in the notes what it is that got complete. In fact, this might be an interesting way to remind myself to keep doing at least one Next Action for a big project... hmmm!!
* I also use the notes in the obvious ways, like recording extra info for tasks that need it, building and room number for a meeting or presentation (I keep the Locations field for more general locations, like @home or @campus), phone numbers for those inevitable "call so-and-so" tasks, etc.
I hope that my ideas have been helpful, to both the users and the developers! Maybe something in my approach can provide an inkling of an idea that helps make subtasks an actual and advertisable feature!
Posted at 2:59pm on November 6, 2007
OH -- I almost totally forgot about how I designed my To Do lists in plain text before I decided to switch to software assistance!!
[_] some task that isn't done yet
[x] some task that is complete
[/] some task that's partly done
It looks better in a monospaced font, but I've gotten used to understanding what I mean no matter what font it's in. I had forgotten how much I liked this approach though! I will likely be going back to this in my Notes!
I also just realized that a lot of what I said smacks of David Allen's "Next Actions". And in particular, I'm thinking that the idea that a project could masquerade as a task is quite an understatement -- I'm sure a LOT tasks can be broken up into the itty bitty bits!! But it also seems silly to list every little Next Action as an actual full-fledged task, even though that would make it easier to to search the tasks by context.
So what I'm thinking is ... In the case of sequential actions, perhaps the context of the task as listed should be set by the context of the next action, especially if all other actions are dependent on the next one. Of course, it is also easy enough in RTM to tag something with multiple contexts, which is part of why I like it so much, so perhaps all the contexts would be listed. And maybe a task with subtasks would simply have some additional symbol within its description, reminding me that there are subtasks... something classier than just saying so in brackets (like the "but first..." idea I had above!)
Here's an example of what I'm envisioning.
"Get oven fixed" is obviously a project begging to be split into smaller pieces. So I'm going to add some subtasks in a note, and change the task description to this:
- get oven fixed (*)
Where the (*) reminds me that there is more to this task than meets the eye! So I go to the Notes field, and see this one:
NEXT ACTIONS: (the first line is conveniently bolded, but I capitalize it for extra emphasis!)
[x] @pc, url:yellowpages.ca: search for local appliance repair people and their phone numbers
[x] @phone: call several places and make appointments for inspections
[x] @home, due: ? meet with RepairPerson #1 at X:30.
[/] @pc: type up #1's comments and their quote
[_] @home, due: ? meet with RepairPerson #2 at Y:00.
[_] @pc: type up #2's comments and their quote
[/] @spouse: discuss choices and analyses, and decide what to do next
OK, so this is not only a Tips & Tricks, but it's also an idea masquerading as a tip! :P Or a tip that contains ideas of how this function might be able to be implemented without messing up the beauty of RTM... maybe? :P
Posted at 3:34pm on November 6, 2007
says:well. i know this is beating a dead horse, but I really just started using rtm habitually and one of the only things i could think of to make this already unbelievably awesome application to be better is by adding support for dependencies. i'm not currently a pro user, but i'd become a pro user and be perfectly willing to pay double for it, for this feature.
Posted at 12:15am on February 20, 2008
I agree - as a programmer, adding a dependency shouldn't be too difficult. Will it be work? yes. Should it be placed in the Pro version and charged for? I don't know... I might if I had the source and could analyze how much effort was needed to implement it.
But barring a huge list of dependent tasks, it shouldn't be all that difficult to implement. And I, for one, would love it.
I've only been on RTM for a week or so, and already I could use dependent tasks.
Posted at 11:31pm on March 5, 2008
says:This is at the top of my wish list, too. [crossing fingers]
Posted at 10:41am on March 31, 2008
says:This is at the top of my list.
Posted at 1:51pm on April 14, 2008
I use RTM for Gmail although reluctantly. I really need sub-tasks for my task list to be effective. Until then, it is just a reminder system for me. Not a true task completion tool.
Posted at 4:44am on April 15, 2008
says: I have read through most of these ideas and would like to offer another, maybe simpler solution... We can currently add multiple notes to each task. Why not make a button that would promote/highlite a selected note to a subtask?
The note/subtask would remain where it is today. It would just be colored differently to illustrate that its a subtask and not a note.
If one needed to add a due date to the subtask- that would promote the action to a full task.
I agree with some of the posters here, I dont want to see this turn into lists, sublists, sub-sublists, etc. If people want that, then they should look at project management software. The beauty of RTM is its simplicity, and access anywhere. My 2 cents :)
Posted at 2:19pm on April 15, 2008
This is the number one feature I would request as well.
Posted at 11:35pm on April 15, 2008
this would make RTM unbeatable for me
Posted at 12:07pm on May 2, 2008
This is the only thing on my wish list.
Posted at 3:13pm on May 8, 2008
says:Does anybody know any online to-do lists that include this feature? I don't know if it's difficult to accomplish in Web 2.0, or what the deal is, but it's definitely something I'd love to see.
Posted at 4:15pm on May 8, 2008
I've been hunting around for RTM alternatives that offer this, that would not leave me pining for all the things I now take for granted re RTM* - so far I've drawn a blank. Nozbe comes close; you can designate a task in a project the 'next action' but the system will not automatically pick the next 'next action' each time you mark the existing one complete.
*I've left RTM once before, for Todist and then Vitalist, but each eventually wore me down with basic UI difficulties that slowed down the process of GTD - at the moment RTM is my top dog (or cow ;) )
Posted at 9:41am on May 15, 2008
says:This is something that I, also, would _love_ to see added as a feature - being able to 'stack' tasks. The idea being that on completion of the uppermost task, the next task comes to the top of the stack.
This would be completely and utterly fantastic!
Posted at 2:42pm on May 15, 2008
It is an embarrassment for the developers that this functionality does not exist.
Posted at 5:02pm on May 15, 2008
says:Great idea, This is much needed.
Posted at 1:24am on May 16, 2008
Besides complex projects, this has amazing household application. E.g., instead of creating a list called Shopping and adding things there (possibly with a due date), it's much easier to create a Shopping task with a due date and add the items as subtasks to it.
So count me in.
Posted at 1:42am on May 16, 2008
says:@ denisbaranov - could I ask how creating sub-tasks of a task would be any easier than adding tasks in a list? Wouldn't a smartlist with tag:shopping handle this just fine? It's not as if the items within a shopping list are in any way dependent (unless your adding them in the exact order in which the items are found in your store, I guess). I've seen many usage scenarios for dependent tasks that seem sensible to me, but I think I missing something here.
Posted at 2:31am on May 16, 2008
says:@jmuela - it's an embarrassment that the developers have to put up with such commentary from people who have not contributed anything to their project. If it's so easy to code, then please go do so yourself. Or use some other site that offers a solution that fits your needs. I think it's laudable that RTM has chosen to adhere to their original vision for their site in the face of so much ill-considered clamor for a notional feature that would likely add complexity and ugliness to a site whose appeal comes from the flexibility that arises from its versatile simplicity.
Posted at 2:36am on May 16, 2008
says:Ranbarton, the RTM folk can defend themselves as adequately as they like -- and by being so deeply vitriolic in your responses, you're merely creating work for them, in that you're ramping up the emotional level of a thread in their forums, which, if it gets too out of hand, then requires they divert their attention to it in order to moderate it.
Stop. Deep breath. This is just the Internet, after all.
If you feel that people are speaking ill-advised opinions, how important is it to fight them back at every turn? Answer: Not very important at all.
There are people in China and Myenmar who right now would absolutely love for their biggest problem to be whether or not a website offers a feature.
Posted at 4:34pm on May 16, 2008
This is the main thing I think RTM is missing for me, is a way to make projects with tasks indented under other tasks.
Posted at 7:15am on May 17, 2008
This would much improve this product for me. Please RTM, consider.
Posted at 12:53am on May 25, 2008
@ranbarton: I don't know how you do your shopping. Maybe you bring your laptop or you don't mind scrolling through numerous smart lists on your phone. I like to see the list on my phone where real estate is limited. Also, when I look at today's tasks, I don't want to see every single item I need to purchase. I want to see an expandable task "Shopping" with the list of necessary items upon request. My current workaround is having notes, but they are useless for checking off items.
Besides, nobody says that one must use that feature once it's implemented. There are many people here who need subtasks for far more complex uses, and you, as a incredibly proud "pro" user, must realize that if RTM wants to attract and keep user-base, they must be on par in the feature-set with the rest of the competition.
Posted at 4:33am on May 25, 2008
@dave.pearce
Luv ur idea. I was thinkin of the same. other day, I had a task to buy an external HDD. When i bought it, i wanted more information added such as the date when i bought, where i bought, and when the warranty ends.
These could have been under the same task, with the warranty end date marked as a full task, or may be the completed task changed into a new task.
This notes idea sounds easier to implement in RTM and keep RTM simple at the same time.
Posted at 1:46am on May 28, 2008
Yet another vote for this feature. Would really complete the program for me. With the coding skill the developers have shown, there's no way this is out of reach, and I'm sure it could be elegantly integrated into the UI.
Posted at 9:04pm on May 28, 2008
says:This is one feature I miss having switched from LifeBalance. LB allowed for subprojects to be ordered and then presented in sequence as predecessor task was completed.
Posted at 10:16am on May 29, 2008
yes please
Posted at 2:37pm on May 29, 2008
I hope it doesn't look like I'm spamming the forum, but I started using RTM last night and love it except for the lack of sub-tasking.
To see a nice implementation of this check out ThoughtManager by Hands High. I mention this just for comparison since TM isn't an online app. I'm on a iPod Touch now so TM isn't an option anymore.
I'd go pro in a heartbeat if RTM had sub-tasking. I'd go pro even faster with an offline mode for iPod Touch.
Please?
Posted at 10:07pm on May 29, 2008
says:@denisbaranov : When I shop, I bring a print out of my shopping smartlist, and I cross things out as I go. Then when I get home, I select all and mark all as complete. No laptops or fancy phones needed.
As for being a proud pro user, I apologize if the Pro thing comes across as pompous. I am an early adopter of RTM, and my bias here is that I think RTM can do, in its current state, much of what people think needs to be added. Thus I try to urge people to use the tool's capabilities, so that the RTM crew can focus their obviously limited development efforts on things that are actually new capabilities. Like printing with notes and multi-criteria sort, for example.
Posted at 3:15pm on June 3, 2008
+1
Posted at 2:48pm on June 14, 2008
says:Add another vote (or 5) for adding functionality for dependent/sequential tasks and subtasks.
Thanks.
Posted at 6:25pm on June 14, 2008
+1
Posted at 9:46pm on June 15, 2008
I would use dependent tasks.
Posted at 11:26pm on July 7, 2008
says:I would also use this feature
Posted at 6:13pm on July 8, 2008
Want!
Posted at 6:22pm on July 8, 2008
Another vote for dependent tasks!
Posted at 9:03am on July 22, 2008
says:and another vote!!
Posted at 8:55pm on July 24, 2008
