Re: [Tsheetx-developers] Simple time sheet

[David T. <tom...@us...>]

I would disagree with the view that you shouldn't switch between the two, why not? Sometimes you just want to say I worked today from 7 to 18, and let the TS work out how many hours that was, and other times you say OK, yesterday I did about 4 hours.

 

If the simple timesheet didn't have all the problems that Peter has rightly identified, then it wouldn't be so tricky to swap between the two styles of entry. I could imagine merging the simple and weekly timesheets and offering the user the choice of style.

 

Cheers
 
> From: it...@ea...
> To: pal...@gm...; tsh...@li...
> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 19:37:05 -0400
> Subject: Re: [Tsheetx-developers] Simple time sheet
> 
> 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.
>