You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Not sure how to summarize this in the title so sorry if it was confusing..
In our on-call, we have multiple roles where one requires a higher level of permissions than the primary. Let's call them primary and secure. All members of the secure role will be part of the primary role as well, but there are a couple of people in the primary role that is not cleared for the secure role.
I would therefor like the scheduler to only schedule an extra for the more secure role when necessary, i.e when someone without the secure role is scheduled for primary.
Example:
Primary:
Mark
John
Fred
Secure:
Mark
John
Weekly schedule:
W1: Mark
W2: John
W3: Fred & Mark
W4: Mark
W5: John
W6: Fred & John
I haven't figured out a way to do this with the current version, so I guess it needs another scheduling algorithm?
It's difficult to explain, so I hope this makes sense.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi,
Not sure how to summarize this in the title so sorry if it was confusing..
In our on-call, we have multiple roles where one requires a higher level of permissions than the primary. Let's call them primary and secure. All members of the secure role will be part of the primary role as well, but there are a couple of people in the primary role that is not cleared for the secure role.
I would therefor like the scheduler to only schedule an extra for the more secure role when necessary, i.e when someone without the secure role is scheduled for primary.
Example:
Primary:
Mark
John
Fred
Secure:
Mark
John
Weekly schedule:
W1: Mark
W2: John
W3: Fred & Mark
W4: Mark
W5: John
W6: Fred & John
I haven't figured out a way to do this with the current version, so I guess it needs another scheduling algorithm?
It's difficult to explain, so I hope this makes sense.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: