Is the New Ranking attribute used by the scheduler in RTC 4.0.4?
Hi,
we are using RTC 4.0.4. I've assigned the New Ranking value to the work items as described in article: https://jazz.net/library/article/1289.
But when a resource is assigned to multiple tasks that start at the same time, the scheduler reschedules simultaneous tasks using the ID of the work items, not the New Ranking attribute. Is this working as expected? If New Ranking is set, shouldn't the scheduler use this attribute to schedule the simultaneous tasks?
Am I missing any configuration? Should I configure the New Ranking somehow to be used by the Scheduler?
Regards,
Lorena Almela
we are using RTC 4.0.4. I've assigned the New Ranking value to the work items as described in article: https://jazz.net/library/article/1289.
But when a resource is assigned to multiple tasks that start at the same time, the scheduler reschedules simultaneous tasks using the ID of the work items, not the New Ranking attribute. Is this working as expected? If New Ranking is set, shouldn't the scheduler use this attribute to schedule the simultaneous tasks?
Am I missing any configuration? Should I configure the New Ranking somehow to be used by the Scheduler?
Regards,
Lorena Almela
One answer
Hi Lorena,
as far as I know, the scheduler does not push the order of the items down to the users. Once all data is available to schedule a work item, it is scheduled a next to the owner.
What the owner is supposed to be doing later is, based on the ranking, order the work items in his my work view, or to start working on then based on the rank.
I would agree it would be desirable to improve on this. You should consider to write an enhancement request.
as far as I know, the scheduler does not push the order of the items down to the users. Once all data is available to schedule a work item, it is scheduled a next to the owner.
What the owner is supposed to be doing later is, based on the ranking, order the work items in his my work view, or to start working on then based on the rank.
I would agree it would be desirable to improve on this. You should consider to write an enhancement request.