Setting scope-property on resources-column #242
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Removed a negation so scopeProperty will be handled like property. This negation collided with how the RTF query-generator assigned scopeproperty.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Hi!
Currently in the task-report for the column resources the scope-property is not set, so we cannot get the per-task effort of the assigned resources.
This patch introduces setting the scope-property accordingly, so f.e. the effort of a assigned resource will be shown for the assigned task only and not the total effort. Total effort is still accessbile by using the query-generator with an empty scope-property.
According to the in-code documentation, this seems like the way it was originally intended to work. Hope this patch helps.
As my experience with the internal workings of TJ stems from reading up, I recommend checking for repercussion on other parts of the code. But at least in my instance everything seems to work as expected.
Kind regards,
Jörn