posts that dcpugh is monitoring

Topic: Workitem Relationships

Absolutely Denis, in fact we are working on implementing explicit dependencies as I type.

Topic: Workitem Relationships

Adam,
Thanks for the feedback, but I think Dave earlier encapsulated the issue and I’ll try to restate it:
Person X is doing Task 1
Task 2 (whoever does it) is logically dependent on Task 1 being marked or declared as “Done”
Therefore the earliest start date for Task 2 is the declared finish date of Task 1
(In parentheses, logically, the role of Person X or any other Person is immaterial – the relationship exists only between the tasks)
Logically, this means fluidity: in essence I can’t know, estimate or guarantee when my project will finish until I know that Task 1 is complete (or I have a new estimate for it, because whoever is doing Task 2 may have a good probabilistic estimate but needs to know the likely start date for that estimate)

Does that make sense? I mean what I say; this is cool and promising software. But how about this point?

Regards,

Denis

Topic: Workitem Relationships

We have avoided implementing explicit cross person dependencies up to this point since we found that implicit dependencies actually captured most of what we needed as a team. We’ve actually been using LiquidPlanner to plan LiquidPlanner. With that in mind… I happen to see an explicit dependencies workitem at the top of our list right now ;)

This is an evolving product and I’m keeping an eye out for anything that will help you guys plan your projects better, so keep letting us know what you would like to see.

Topic: Workitem Relationships

I’ve been using LP for about a week and for me this is the standout “omission” in what is otherwise a seriously good product (I would have posted this to the forums but I was having some difficulties in logging in here). You guys may have plans to introduce it, or it’s there and I can’t see it or you may have a philosophical explanation for the “omission” but I’d be glad to see your comments.

Denis