Wow! great update. Now make filters shareable (or be able to “copy” from other views like airtable) and you will make me so happy.
Can you give an example of a use case and the ideal flow in such a case?
Say, I have a table view of Tasks, grouped by Feature, and there are filters applied (Feature is In Progress and Task Effort is > 10).
What comes next?
As far as I know, Airtable doesn’t support showing different types in the same view in the way Fibery does, so an Airtable view always belongs to a specific type (= table in Airtable nomenclature). This means it is always possible to map filters from one view to another. How do you imagine ot might work in Fibery, where this is not the case?
I’m going to paste the answer I gave last time:
For example, I have a filter to hide old, finished, or discarded tasks to avoid cluttering the views.
I want this filter in a table and board with further filters (for some teams).
Also when I start a new project (space) I want to use the same filter. A solution like airtable were you copy colors and filters would be super useful.
Same for colors, I need to create the same manually between views or new projects.
And about Airtable, they allow you to copy filters and colors from another view, saving a LOT of time:
I guess solutions like Jira, where you save filters and then apply them to different “views/boards”, would be better for big companies allowing you to modify the filter and be applied everywhere. Still, for medium-sized companies I’ve always worked for (20-100 employees), the airtable solution is the best, and I think it is much simpler to integrate.
So does this mean you only need to copy filters from/to views which contain the same single type?
If you’re setting up new views each time you start a project (and you want the same filters/sorting/color-coding each time) I wonder if you would be wise to use a smart folder for the project, and then use mirrored views.
In general, you shouldn’t need to regularly set up new views (it should be more of a one-off initial configuration exercise) so perhaps this is something to look into
Smart folders are awesome when you have teams but when you want to visualize data in different ways you need to do the manuals filters and colors each time.
Not sure what do you mean with the “single type”.
Why are teams relevant here?
You can have a smart folder of projects, and each project gets the same set of predefined views (with filters/sorting/color-coding).
Have you used mirrored context views?
Or do you mean that you have a lot of variation in the views you need from project to project?
If you have a view that only shows Tasks, it’s easier to imagine how you would copy filters to another view which only shows Tasks. But if you have Tasks and Meetings on one view, it becomes more challenging to copy the filters over to a view that shows Features and Tasks.
In my use case, videogame development, smart folders are useful for functional teams (3D, concept, etc.). I can imagine that smart folders would be used for projects or clients in other use cases, like an agency with multiple clients.
I’m looking into the mirrored context views. Is there a way that the folders use the sort criteria (Name, Ascending) of the view?
Anyway, I don’t fully understand how this need is always received with so much resistance. At least all the project management solutions I’ve used in the last 10 years have some way to share filters between projects or views.
- Clickup
- Jira
- Businessmap (kanbanize)
- Airtable
I think that even Trello has it for paid customers.
I’m not trying to be a jerk; I’m honestly curious.
Sorry. I don’t understand the question.
Which view?
You can certainly apply sorting on smart folders - it’s under the Configure menu option:
I’m not trying to offer resistance, just trying to understand the root use case, rather than jumping to assuming that ‘filter copy’ is the right solution.
Fibery is different to a lot of other tools, so often there is a way to achieve the end goal in a different (sometimes better) way.
You wrote:
so it seemed to me that the ideal solution would mean that every time you start a new project, it automatically has all the necessary views (with your desired filters/sorting/color-coding) and so you don’t even need to manually copy anything from an existing view.
That’s why I thought smart folders with mirrored context views could be a solution for you.
1 Like
I don’t love throwing my hat in on questions like these because we don’t know the code base that well. So, excuse my ignorance here. Why not map the filters over on a per database basis?
Like a query that searches the view for which databases are present and only applies the filters that match the databases present. It can discard the rest.
Sure, that could work, but the UI wouldn’t be as simple as it is in the Airtable example.
As it happens, I feel like making new views should be an activity that happens more in the setting up phase of a workspace and after an initial period, it should occur less often.
Accordingly, rather than being solution-focussed (‘we want filter copy function’) I was trying to be needs/problem focussed (‘we often need to recreate views with the same filters’) and then consider what the optimal solution might be.
In this case, I was thinking about the ‘often’ part and trying to figure out whether repeated manual creation of multiple similar views could be avoided with smart folders.