Time in hours

I don’t know about anyone elese, but I’ve never, in 35 years in this
business, heard of keeping track of work in minutes. Even Microsoft
Project only goes as low as 1/4 hours. Is there anyway we can get the RT
masters to change the time fields to hours and also calculate time
estimated minus time worked giving time left? It seems like a small
thing but it really would make sense. Just a suggestion (don’t want to
offend anyone’s sensitivities). Thanks.

Kenn
KFCrocker@lbl.gov

It shouldn’t be too hard to work this as a Callback. That way you can
display it the way you want it displayed without changing it for
everyone. I know we have lot of 5 minute jobs and those stack up in
our overall time worked…

Ken Crocker wrote:

I don’t know about anyone elese, but I’ve never, in 35 years in this
business, heard of keeping track of work in minutes. Even Microsoft
Project only goes as low as 1/4 hours. Is there anyway we can get the
RT masters to change the time fields to hours and also calculate time
estimated minus time worked giving time left? It seems like a small
thing but it really would make sense. Just a suggestion (don’t want to
offend anyone’s sensitivities). Thanks.

Kenn
KFCrocker@lbl.gov


http://lists.bestpractical.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rt-users

Be sure to check out the RT Wiki at http://wiki.bestpractical.com

Download a free sample chapter of RT Essentials from O’Reilly Media at
http://rtbook.bestpractical.com

WE’RE COMING TO YOUR TOWN SOON - RT Training in Amsterdam, Boston and
San Francisco - Find out more at
http://bestpractical.com/services/training.html

Drew Barnes
Applications Analyst
Raymond Walters College
University of Cincinnati

I don’t know about anyone elese, but I’ve never, in 35 years in this
business, heard of keeping track of work in minutes. Even Microsoft
Project only goes as low as 1/4 hours. Is there anyway we can get the RT
masters to change the time fields to hours and also calculate time
estimated minus time worked giving time left? It seems like a small
thing but it really would make sense. Just a suggestion (don’t want to
offend anyone’s sensitivities). Thanks.

It’s really a mistake that the field granularity isn’t in seconds. Do
note that RT gets used in a lot of scenarios that aren’t project
management. Even scenarios where some of the actors are automated
agents.

But have a look at RT 3.5, where we give you your choice of minutes and
hours :wink:

Jesse

(FWIW It seems fairly common in the legal profession to bill in increments
of hundredths of an hour.)

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHH, that’s music to my ears. I have to say that in 2
generations of Data Processing I really feel the RT system is extremely
robust and flexible. I’ve been working with PeopleSoft for the last 7
years and I’ve never seen such lazy programming. Their NEW 8.8 doesn’t
even bother to alphabatize(sp) the menu listings (so I guess newbies
have to hunt and peck forever until the "LEARN: the system). The RT
authors, on the other hand, really seemed to have tried to do some
common thinking for the users (like pre-filling the Query when going
there from a queue).

Kenn

Jesse Vincent wrote:

I don’t know about anyone elese, but I’ve never, in 35 years in this
business, heard of keeping track of work in minutes. Even Microsoft
Project only goes as low as 1/4 hours. Is there anyway we can get the RT
masters to change the time fields to hours and also calculate time
estimated minus time worked giving time left? It seems like a small
thing but it really would make sense. Just a suggestion (don’t want to
offend anyone’s sensitivities). Thanks.

It’s really a mistake that the field granularity isn’t in seconds. Do
note that RT gets used in a lot of scenarios that aren’t project
management. Even scenarios where some of the actors are automated
agents.

But have a look at RT 3.5, where we give you your choice of minutes and
hours :wink:

Shouldn’t time fields really always be SQL datetimes so queries can be
based on interval math?

Les Mikesell
les@futuresource.com

Shouldn’t time fields really always be SQL datetimes so queries can be
based on interval math?

When you’re talking about a quantity of time instead of a point in time,
you don’t want a datetime.

Also, were I writing RT from scratch today, I’d use big integers and do
all my time in seconds since the epoch. SQL DATETIME fields are a really
nice idea. Until you start thinking about working in multiple timezones.
Or on multiple engines.

Shouldn’t time fields really always be SQL datetimes so queries can be
based on interval math?

When you’re talking about a quantity of time instead of a point in time,
you don’t want a datetime.

The difference between datetimes should be an interval.

Also, were I writing RT from scratch today, I’d use big integers and do
all my time in seconds since the epoch. SQL DATETIME fields are a really
nice idea. Until you start thinking about working in multiple timezones.

SQL is supposed to do timezones.

Or on multiple engines.

Do you mean things that are not really SQL? Why use them?

Les Mikesell
les@futuresource.com

Do you mean things that are not really SQL? Why use them?

I don’t think this list is the place to get into a discussion of the
relativee merits of MySQL, Postgres, Oracle, SQLite, Sybase and FooSQL
and how they relate to the platonic ideal of an SQL database. That
discussion is one that should only be had when there are pints of $BEER
present. Or, I suppose, nuclear weapons.

Jesse

Here Here! My question is being resolved by 3.5 anyway. With that
option, the question becomes moot. Thanks for the comments though.

Kenn

Jesse Vincent wrote: