Loading Profile...
double logging time if a timer is running when the machine goes idle (1279)
If I start logging time,then go to a meeting, when I get back I get the apply idle time message. When I say yes, I get two worklogs.
1
person has this question
I have this question, too!
Tell me when someone answers.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The best answer from the company
-
The issue you reported about overlapping times has been fixed in the latest release. Would you mind adding the "fuzzy merging" request as a separate request if you are interested? This way, the proper source can be attributed! If not, no problems.
Thanks for your report and for trying out the beta!
The company says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Hi Michael,
[Apologies if you get this twice, there was a network failure earlier.]
I think what you are getting is expected behaviour. That is, when the computer goes idle the active task is stopped and becomes a worklog. Then when you return, you choose a task to apply the idle time to.
So if I was working on SUPPORT-1 and was called away, when the computer went idle, I would have a worklog for SUPPORT-1 which includes the time before the computer was detected to be idle.
Then, when I returned, I would choose to apply the away time to MEETINGS-1. So Worklog Assistant would create a new worklog.
So by the end of this, I now have two worklogs. Is this the behaviour you are seeing or did you mean something different? -
Inappropriate?That's not the behavior I'm seeing.
Here's the actual times on the worklog using 1279 on Windows XP:
I started a worklog for NSS-4243 at 10:40:47. I went off to talk to IT about something related to the same issue and was away for about 10 minutes. The log message came up when I got back and I selected NSS-4243. It had a start time of 10:40:50.
The 1st worklog has an endtime of 10:50:48 (elapsed 0h 10m).
The 2nd worklog has an endtime of 10:51:50 (elapsed 0h 11m).
It looks to me as if the timer kept running while the idle timer was going. -
Inappropriate?Correct, my original response (which disappeared due to network difficulties) did acknowledge this issue. Forgot to include it the second time around. Sorry!
So as you have noticed, when the computer goes idle the "time to get idle" is included in the original worklog as well as the new task. In the case above, would you expect 1 minute for the "second" worklog or 11 minutes for the second with 0 for the first? I suspect you are thinking that it would ideally be 11 minutes with one worklog but what would be your second-favourite behaviour?
I am about to upload a new beta which would have the second worklog be one minute rather than 11 so now would be a good time to make a suggestion :-) -
Inappropriate?I like 11 for the second and 0 for the first. The last time I touched the ticket is the most current info, and that's post-idle.
Do you plan to have any kind of validation of times? no more than 24 hours/day, stop (or maybe alert) the user if the same time is being reported twice, merge worklogs with the same issue and stop-time of #1 = start time of #2, etc?1 Comment Add a comment
This answers the question
-
This modification is now in the updated beta. You can download it from here: http://next.worklogassistant.com/down...
What happens now is once the computer is detected to idle, the active task's end time is set to be the current time minus the time the computer was detected to be idle. Please let me know what you think! The new beta is here: http://next.worklogassistant.com -
Inappropriate?I thought you might! I'll probably have an update for tomorrow.
As of right now, the only plans for validation are to show the # of hours that have been submitted in the last N-hour period as per the suggestion here: http://gsfn.us/t/7ya9 - No ETA on this I'm afraid.
I think your idea about merging worklogs is a good one. What about fuzzy merging where we merge worklogs if they differ by no more than 1 minute in start/stop times? -
Inappropriate?fuzzy merging would be fine. Right now we're tracking to the half hour anyway, so I could even see merging if they're within 2 or 3 m being OK with us.
I assume that the worklog comments would be merged? -
Inappropriate?Ok, maybe the fuzzy merging can be an advanced config item.
The worklog comments would be merged as well. Probably just by concatenating (and separating by newlines) in chronological order. -
Inappropriate?The issue you reported about overlapping times has been fixed in the latest release. Would you mind adding the "fuzzy merging" request as a separate request if you are interested? This way, the proper source can be attributed! If not, no problems.
Thanks for your report and for trying out the beta!
The company says
this answers the question
EMPLOYEE
