Task linked to another task can't be filtered consistently if brackets are empty

If I create a task & then link to that task with [[ from a 2nd task, whether inside that same list or outside of it, if I then use a filter on the list that contains the 2nd task then this 2nd task won’t show up consistently if the brackets are empty.

For example…

Unfiltered with empty brackets: image

Filtered with empty brackets: image

Unfiltered without empty brackets: image

Filtered without empty brackets: image

Sometimes it’ll work for some reason, but most times it won’t.

Hello Josh,

Basically, items with links should ‘inherit’ attributes of the linked item when the item consists solely from the link to another item. But there was a bug, fixed on beta. Could you please check if the filtering works as expected on beta.checkvist.com?


Thank you for the prompt attention!

I just tried the situations described above again, but the results are still not as expected.

I would expect the results when “Filtered with empty brackets” to be the same as when “Filtered without empty brackets” since the 2nd task does not inherit due dates, assignees, etc from the linked task but rather has its own.

What was happening before is that said 2nd task could not be filtered with its own due dates, assignees, etc since they were simply ignored by the search if the brackets were empty.

So, for example, if I have a 2nd task like [](/cvt/54192070) ^today and I use the filter due: today then this 2nd task will not show up in the search, but it will show up if said 2nd task is like [Task 2](/cvt/54192070) ^today instead.

What is happening now in beta.checkvist.com is that the 2nd task will show up if I search for the linked task’s due dates, assignees, etc but it will still not show up if I search for its own, so this fix would actually be the opposite of the expected.

Hello Josh,

Thanks for the explanation. We’ve made a fix which should ignore mirrored task attributes when the linking task has own attributes, such a due, assignee etc.

Basically, I hope the behaviour should be fixed on beta. Could you please check on your side?


Just tried & it looks good, now.

Thank you very much!