Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
>> AFAICT the performance of marking tasks done which contain *a lot* of >> inactive timestams has degraded considerably with this change. >> >> Example: >> >> #v+ >> * TODO task >> SCHEDULED: <2018-11-15 .+1d> >> :PROPERTIES: >> :STYLE:habit >> :LAST_REPEAT: [2018-11-14 16:26] >> :END: >> >> [2018-07-10 Tue 11:29]--[2018-07-10 Tue 12:10] >> [2018-07-09 Mon 15:20]--[2018-07-09 Mon 15:23] >> [2018-07-08 Sun 09:01]--[2018-07-08 Sun 09:20] >> ... >> >> ... >> [2013-07-08 Sun 09:01]--[2013-07-08 Sun 09:20] >> #v- >> >> Sorry for not having digged deeper into this issue yet. > > I think it should now be fixed in master. Could you confirm it? Looks fine to me! Thanks! Ciao, -- Marco
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hello, Marco Wahl writes: > AFAICT the performance of marking tasks done which contain *a lot* of > inactive timestams has degraded considerably with this change. > > Example: > > #v+ > * TODO task > SCHEDULED: <2018-11-15 .+1d> > :PROPERTIES: > :STYLE:habit > :LAST_REPEAT: [2018-11-14 16:26] > :END: > > [2018-07-10 Tue 11:29]--[2018-07-10 Tue 12:10] > [2018-07-09 Mon 15:20]--[2018-07-09 Mon 15:23] > [2018-07-08 Sun 09:01]--[2018-07-08 Sun 09:20] > ... > > ... > [2013-07-08 Sun 09:01]--[2013-07-08 Sun 09:20] > #v- > > Sorry for not having digged deeper into this issue yet. I think it should now be fixed in master. Could you confirm it? Thank you. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hi! > Leo Gaspard writes: > >> Here is a translated example task from my .org file: >> >> *** TODO Check bank report >> SCHEDULED: <2000-02-10 Thu +1m> >> >> Dated [2000-01-01 Sat +1m] >> >> The point of this “Dated” field being to tell me to which report I >> should be looking, given I sometimes am a month late or so in checking >> my reports, and just put them in the (physical) drawer as I receive >> them. >> >> This “Dated” field is exactly what I would like to see updated when I >> mark the task as done (like the SCHEDULED date), but it looks like it >> doesn't move. > > Org didn't handle repeaters in inactive time stamps. This is now fixed > (in master). Thank you. AFAICT the performance of marking tasks done which contain *a lot* of inactive timestams has degraded considerably with this change. Example: #v+ * TODO task SCHEDULED: <2018-11-15 .+1d> :PROPERTIES: :STYLE:habit :LAST_REPEAT: [2018-11-14 16:26] :END: [2018-07-10 Tue 11:29]--[2018-07-10 Tue 12:10] [2018-07-09 Mon 15:20]--[2018-07-09 Mon 15:23] [2018-07-08 Sun 09:01]--[2018-07-08 Sun 09:20] ... ... [2013-07-08 Sun 09:01]--[2013-07-08 Sun 09:20] #v- Sorry for not having digged deeper into this issue yet. Ciao, Marco
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Org didn't handle repeaters in inactive time stamps. This is now fixed > (in master). Thank you. Great, thank you!
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hello, Leo Gaspard writes: > Here is a translated example task from my .org file: > > *** TODO Check bank report > SCHEDULED: <2000-02-10 Thu +1m> > > Dated [2000-01-01 Sat +1m] > > The point of this “Dated” field being to tell me to which report I > should be looking, given I sometimes am a month late or so in checking > my reports, and just put them in the (physical) drawer as I receive > them. > > This “Dated” field is exactly what I would like to see updated when I > mark the task as done (like the SCHEDULED date), but it looks like it > doesn't move. Org didn't handle repeaters in inactive time stamps. This is now fixed (in master). Thank you. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hi Julius, Julius Dittmar writes: > if you want a task to re-open at a later date upon closing, add a line of > :REPEAT_TO_STATE: TODO > to the PROPERTIES drawer of that task. Well, I guess I stated my problem poorly, sorry :) Here is a translated example task from my .org file: *** TODO Check bank report SCHEDULED: <2000-02-10 Thu +1m> Dated [2000-01-01 Sat +1m] The point of this “Dated” field being to tell me to which report I should be looking, given I sometimes am a month late or so in checking my reports, and just put them in the (physical) drawer as I receive them. This “Dated” field is exactly what I would like to see updated when I mark the task as done (like the SCHEDULED date), but it looks like it doesn't move. Is there a trick to do this? Cheers, Leo
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hi Leo, if you want a task to re-open at a later date upon closing, add a line of :REPEAT_TO_STATE: TODO to the PROPERTIES drawer of that task. Hth, Julius
Re: [O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hello all! It's been ~2 weeks so I hope you'll forgive me bumping my post :) Do you have an opinion about this idea? Cheers, Leo Leo Gaspard writes: > Hello all! > > I have been using org-mode for a few days (switching over from > todo.txt [1]), and for the time being my experience has been great! > > There is a single thing I found weird up to now: it seems that > recurrence tags in <> and [] “tags” don't get bumped when a task is > completed and has a recurrence set in its SCHEDULED or DEADLINE date. > > The reason I'd like this is because I have monthly bank statements, > which come in the next month, and I'd like to store the bank statement's > date in a [] “tag” so that I can easily know which statement I'm > supposed to handle, even though this date is neither a SCHEDULED (as I > don't have the statement yet at the date it's produced) nor a DEADLINE > (for the same reason). > > What do you think about this? > > Anyway, thanks a lot for the great work! > > Cheers, > Leo > > > [1] http://todotxt.org/
[O] [feature] Handle recurrence in <> and [] dates
Hello all! I have been using org-mode for a few days (switching over from todo.txt [1]), and for the time being my experience has been great! There is a single thing I found weird up to now: it seems that recurrence tags in <> and [] “tags” don't get bumped when a task is completed and has a recurrence set in its SCHEDULED or DEADLINE date. The reason I'd like this is because I have monthly bank statements, which come in the next month, and I'd like to store the bank statement's date in a [] “tag” so that I can easily know which statement I'm supposed to handle, even though this date is neither a SCHEDULED (as I don't have the statement yet at the date it's produced) nor a DEADLINE (for the same reason). What do you think about this? Anyway, thanks a lot for the great work! Cheers, Leo [1] http://todotxt.org/
