[OGo-Users] Re: [OGo-Developer] Changes to trunk, Testing

[Sebastian Reitenbach]

users@opengroupware.org wrote: 
> On 08.02.2008, at 16:58, Sebastian Reitenbach wrote:
> > ah, there it is, thanks for your patience. but this still does not  
> > help, for the situation described in the other mail:
> > assume two projectors available, projector one is booked in the  
> > morning, projector two is booked in the evening, then the third  
> > person comes, and wants a projector, for a whole day meeting the  
> > same day, then the proposal will not find a free time slot (Got no  
> > free time interval).
> 
> Thats correct, though the fact is visualized in the resourcemanager.  
> (he will see when each of the projectors is booked and can coordinate  
> that with the guys).
> 
> Not sure how much that is a real world problem. Eg usually the  
> resource will not be 100% equal but have an associated 'quality' (eg  
> big room, small room), hence will require offline interaction who  
> takes what.
people don't want to bother which projector they get, they just want to make 
sure that they get one. its hard to get these people adding resources as 
they should, and then they are bothered with conflicts that they have to 
resolve manually. that costs time and makes people frustrated, and keeps the 
resource manager busy.

> 
> > So it is not working as I wanted it to work, but when there would be  
> > an "amount" field in the database for a given resource, then this  
> > could be made to work.
> 
> I think it would be more useful to persist the fact that the user  
> selected a 'group' (hence doesn't care which projector he gets).
but they run into resource conflicts, where they doesn't really need to.

> 
> (As mentioned I don't like the non-identity idea in any case)
an amount of 1 would would make the resource unique, a number of n would 
make n resources available. The admin could raise or lower the number, e.g. 
in case a projector breaks. A "very large number" would allow to book 
virtually unlimited resources, like coffe, soft-drinks, ... 

and for some reason, people tend to use the new button instead of the 
proposal function. When you create an appointment, then you cannot select 
groups.

> 
> > well, I also used the categories in an a bit different way, than you  
> > might have intended. E.g. I have a category "Camping", whereas I  
> > have a fishing rod, a tent, and other stuff in it. So completely  
> > different usage of the resource Categories than you are expecting  
> > that it is used.
> 
> OK, so you used it for grouping arbitary stuff (as a group, not as a  
> category). Thats not what its intended for.
I tend to use the english language version of ogo, there its translated as 
category, and I understood it as those.

> And obviously it doesn't match the scheduling algorithm (in fact its  
> exactly the opposite, for fishing you would need all the stuff).

> 
> > Personally, I like my broad categorizing ;) but would like to have  
> > groups of resources within these categories
> 
> Yes, groups of resources are also a nice idea. We might want to add  
> that (including the implied semantics, which is 'schedule all  
> contained objects').
yes, would be nice.

> 
> > where the amount column in the database would help me.
> 
> Its very unlikely that I will add an amount.
hmm, why not, what would it cost, it would allow all above mentioned stuff?
so, I still think it could be more use than harmful.

cheers
Sebastian