Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Tsheetx-developers] Simple time sheet
|
From: EAS L. IT D. <it...@ea...> - 2010-09-21 23:37:15
|
I've got to agree with Scott... If you want to enter start and stop times, use the Stopwatch, Daily Timesheet, or Weekly Timesheet. The Simple timesheet works great for those who only need to enter hours and minutes and the start/stop times don't mean anything to us: just the time in the end -----Original Message----- From: Peter Lazarus [mailto:pal...@gm...] Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 2010 7:05 PM To: tsh...@li... Subject: [Tsheetx-developers] Simple time sheet I posted this comment on simple timesheet entry on the bug tracking system. Scott Miller has responded and suggested we discuss this issue on the developers forum. Can the wider community add their opinions and suggestions. Scott's response is reproduced further down. Peter I've been using the simple timesheet to add a function for submitting and approving timesheets. The more I work on my new function I discover that simple timesheet has some inconsistencies with the other entry methods. One issue that I don't like is that simple deletes the time records and them puts them back. This means quite a lot of detail can be lost. So can we suggest/design a new time entry format, perhaps similar to simple's approach. Some of the requirements I would like to see are: - enter times for the week against the projects/tasks - time entry must include start and stop times to be consistent with the other input - multiple periods on the one day against one project/task/description similar to what can be entered with daily or weekly - changes to existing times cause db updates rather than deletion/insertion - ability to submit time records for a week for approval (requires a supervisor) although submission could be done in another panel (0000231) Scott Miller (developer) - 2010-09-21 20:05 http://bugs.timesheetng.org/view.php?id=109#c231 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree that deleting records only to recreate them seems to be the wrong thing to do, but keeping track of what items need to change then becomes necessary and that's not a trivial task. I totally disagree with requiring a start and stop time. Simple was designed for those who don't want to have to deal with start/stop times, and just want to be able to record time spent per item. That said, I believe that if start/stop times exist, they should not be deleted; again this is not trivial. For further discussion, please join the developers mailing list, and lets discuss this there. You can find a link in the wiki area to join. One example of why these are not trivial problems is that simple.php currently combines multiple time entries for identical task/log messages. How do you handle an edit of an aggregate amount of time? I personally believe that users should be free to choose which system they want to use, but I highly recommend NEVER switching between time entry systems because they represent entirely different ways of thinking/looking at time tracking. I've been using the simple timesheet to add a function for submitting and approving timesheets. The more I work on my new function I discover that simple timesheet has some inconsistencies with the other entry methods. One issue that I don't like is that simple deletes the time records and them puts them back. This means quite a lot of detail can be lost. So can we suggest/design a new time entry format, perhaps similar to simple's approach. Some of the requirements I would like to see are: - enter times for the week against the projects/tasks - time entry must include start and stop times to be consistent with the other input - multiple periods on the one day against one project/task/description similar to what can be entered with daily or weekly - changes to existing times cause db updates rather than deletion/insertion - ability to submit time records for a week for approval (requires a supervisor) although submission could be done in another panel Scott Miller's reply posted on bug tracking system: (0000231) Scott Miller (developer) - 2010-09-21 20:05 http://bugs.timesheetng.org/view.php?id=109#c231 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I agree that deleting records only to recreate them seems to be the wrong thing to do, but keeping track of what items need to change then becomes necessary and that's not a trivial task. I totally disagree with requiring a start and stop time. Simple was designed for those who don't want to have to deal with start/stop times, and just want to be able to record time spent per item. That said, I believe that if start/stop times exist, they should not be deleted; again this is not trivial. For further discussion, please join the developers mailing list, and lets discuss this there. You can find a link in the wiki area to join. One example of why these are not trivial problems is that simple.php currently combines multiple time entries for identical task/log messages. How do you handle an edit of an aggregate amount of time? I personally believe that users should be free to choose which system they want to use, but I highly recommend NEVER switching between time entry systems because they represent entirely different ways of thinking/looking at time tracking. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Tsheetx-developers mailing list Tsh...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/tsheetx-developers |
