3 ms·
For this problem, Getting Things Done says you should only record the next task. The second doesn't interest you as you only need to think about it once you're
by maigret 11y ago
For this problem, Getting Things Done says you should only record the next task. The second doesn't interest you as you only need to think about it once you're done with the first.
Work projects have multiple dependencies because they involve often many people, but Agile has been also pushing backward the desire to plan too much in advance.
- Jtsummers 11y agoThe problem (crap, way late to post, sorry) is that you may record the task "Have friends for dinner". THEN you start working backwards on the dependency chain. It's a natural way to break down problems (why am I shopping for food if I don't know what I'm shopping for?). Shopping for my weeknight dinners is different than shopping for my Saturday night party (literally different tasks if they're time separated). So the desire is to be able to record a target task, and obscure it (so to speak) behind the preparatory tasks. This is where projects and other things come into play. Project: Make a journal for my sister's wedding anniversary. Tasks: Purchase materials, assemble, hire artist friend to produce neat drawing on cover, distribute for signing by family (both sides). Those end up becoming ordered in some fashion (purchase materials, then the rest), or running in parallel (hire the artist friend and paste it into the produced journal, send out a single sewn signature to family and sew it into the final product, assemble the rest and wait). If you've only recorded the task "purchase materials" you don't have a concept of what follows it (and it remains in your head). This doesn't mean you need to see the following tasks, yet (software can hand them behind the tasks they depend on or by date or similar). But recording them is not a problem.