Re: [Planner] In need of numbers...

["lincoln phipps openmutual net" <lincoln phipps openmutual net>]

Gary Moffatt wrote:

> Even then WBS numbers can not be sorted neatly by a regular sort - it should 
> be easy to implement a 'hierarchical' sort as opposed to numeric or 
> alphabetical. It truely amazes how popular this scheme is with some clients. 
> (some are rabidly fanatical about WBS) The main benefit of WBS seems to be 
> the ability to label or characterize various hierarchical levels and likewise 
> it would be easy to set a dictionary of WBS titles so they would be available 
> for graphics and reports. (that is '1.2.1' represents 3 levels, each with its 
> own title)


The existing sort order can stay and should always be sorted
like that. The parts of the WBS can come from the mrp_task_get_position()
which is reset at each depth back to 1 i.e. 1, then 1.1
then 1.1.1 etc. The WBS won't need to be used for sorting the
display.

Probably other ways of doing it for performance reasons but I think
the WBS can be made by concatenating the mrp_task_get_position() from
the root down to each task. As each depth has a single position number
it should be able to be formatted into anything and then the result
concatenated into a final WBS string which is displayed. Thats why
I think that not only can a WBS be easily created, it can be
pretty-printed into anything you want.

By default people usually want the numbers separated by a '.' but
if you can put a dot in you can put anything in, thus commas, spaces
or words. The dot is the usual sequence I've used.

/Lincoln.

>  
> On Friday 19 March 2004 13:22, lincoln phipps openmutual net wrote:
>
> > Michael Rissmann wrote:
> >
> > > My problem is that I need the tasks numbered e.g. 1.1 task xy, 1.2 task
> > > xyz, 1.2.1 subtask xyz.
> >
> > Thats a WBS (Work Breakdown Structure) as used by MS Project and others.
> > I've raised a bugzilla to track this,
> > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136946
> > Rgds,
> > Lincoln
> >
> > > Michael