[kplato] Summary of Data Discussion

[Jim Sabatke]

I think your understanding is on the right track.

Jim

Chris Clarke wrote:

>Jim,
>
>The way things are defined in the breakdown doesn't mean that the resource 
>object is contained wholly within the the task object, right now I'm just 
>saying that a task contains a list of the resources that are associated with 
>it, so I don't think the definition is in contrast with your idea.  I've 
>avoided thinking about how a resource is defined because I need help from 
>someone with more experience there.  I think you've provided that now.
>
>Just to make sure we're talking about the same thing, I'll give you an 
>example of what I'm thinking of when I talk about resources:
>
>Let's say I'm the manager of a small team in QA.  I have three members on my 
>team:
>
>QA1: F/T 40 hours/week
>QA2: F/T 40 hours/week
>QA3: P/T 20 hours/week
>
>My tests have to be run on a specific "test string".  Each string is 
>available to my team for 5 hours a day.  I can request extra time if I want, 
>but I need to know in advance.  We'll call this TEST_STRING.
>
>>From my point of view QA1, QA2, QA3, and TEST_STRING are resources because 
>they are required for my tasks and I have a limited amount available.
>
>Now I am planning for the development and conduct of two tests, TEST1 and 
>TEST2.  Each requires one or more people, plus the test equipment, so I end 
>up with this:
>
>TEST1:
>   QA1  (Requires 38 hours development)
>   TEST_STRING (Requires 15 hours of string time)
>
>TEST2:
>   QA1, QA2 (requires 50 hours development can be split across the two)
>    TEST_STRING (requires 30 hours of string time).
>
>Both tests will have their start and end dates constrained by the project 
>defined around them.  Now, the questions I need answered are:
>
>1) Can I complete TEST1 and TEST2 without requiring overtime from my team.
>
>2) Do I have an adequate amount of string time available, or should I request 
>more.
>
>I very much like the idea of associating a risk with a task.  In the above 
>example my estimate on string time would be based on assumptions as to the 
>quality of the software.  Being able to associate a risk to that assumption 
>would be extremely useful.
>
>If I follow what you're saying (and it makes sense to me) it seems that a 
>resource is represented as a task, except that:
>
>a) The same resource can be assigned to multiple tasks, so from the tree view 
>we would have a many-many relationship.  In reality I would probably define 
>resource/subresource relationships like we do with the tasks, so that we 
>would have a one-many relationship between tasks and subresources, and a 
>one-many between resources and subresources.
>
>On the calculation side, we would assign a duration to a resource the way it 
>would be assigned to a task.  These durations could roll up to determine the 
>duration of the task in a manner that is completely analogous to the 
>task/subtask calculations.
>
>b) There is an extra definition in the resource detailing units and units 
>available.  e.g. my string is defined by hours per day, and it's limited to 
>max_hours_per_day (=5 here).  For any period [startdate, enddate]:
>
>    extra_time = total_hours_required -
>                          ( (enddate - startdate) * max_hours_per_day )
>or
>    enddate = total_hours_required / max_hours_per_day + startdate
>
>Depending on the constraints we're placing (of course this is complicated by 
>spreading a single resource across multiple tasks and having to take the 
>float on each task into account so that the resource is not necessarily 
>spread evenly across days, but that's beyond the scope of this discussion).
>
>Comments?
>
>Cheers,
>Chris.
>
>On Monday 18 June 2001 19:50, Jim Sabatke wrote:
>
>>Chris,
>>
>>I would keep "resource" out of the "task" definition for a couple of
>>reasons:
>>
>>1.    Some tasks will have multiple resources
>>2.    I would prefer to have resources listed like CA-Superproject, not
>>in a column like M$ Project.  The resouces would be listed in lines
>>below each task.  The whole task/resource relationship becomes more
>>spreadsheet like, and more flexible.  Example:
>>
>>                        Duration
>>Task1                 15hours
>>    Resource1     10hours
>>    Resource2       5hours
>>
>>Resources would have all the same columns as their tasks.  You could
>>have differing risks for different resources (experiences vs. newbie).
>>The task stats would rollup the resource columns.
>>
>>This would require a:
>>
>>      Task Resource :==
>>            Task ID +
>>            Resource +
>>            All of the task stats
>>
>>
>>Jim
>>
>

-- 
Jim Sabatke
SuSE 7.1 Linux
Kernel - 2.4.0
http://www.execpc.com/~jsabatke

"People tell me that I'm fading fast, that I can't last the whole night through" Janis Ian