[O] undo-tree and org-visibility (was: Re: whether in drawer?)

just changing the subject header. On 4/28/16, Samuel Wales wrote: > On 4/28/16, Adam Porter wrote: >> Do you have any other posts talking about this? I'm interested in >> fixing this too. I've run into situations occasionally where undo-tree >> seems

Re: [O] undo-tree and Org visibility

Samuel, Samuel Wales samolog...@gmail.com writes: When I went back and forth with undo-tree, Org did not show the same visibility that it did during each stage, so I added this defadvice. What it does is make everything visible. My suggestion here is to use M-x show-all RET (or Org cycling)

Re: [O] undo-tree and Org visibility

Hi Bastien, On 2/27/13, Bastien b...@altern.org wrote: My suggestion here is to use M-x show-all RET (or Org cycling) before playing around with `undo-tree-undo' or `undo-tree-visualize'. You will then have a clear view of what is un-done, without the need to worry about the visibility

Re: [O] undo-tree and Org visibility

Hi Samuel, Samuel Wales samolog...@gmail.com writes: Correct me if I'm wrong, but M-x show-all is equivalent to my defadvice (even worse because it shows more). Cycling will work initially, but that will change as soon as some changes in body text forces revealing that entry. What I

Re: [O] undo-tree and Org visibility

On 2/27/13, Bastien b...@altern.org wrote: What I suggest is a less convoluted version of your advice, where you would call `show-all' as a before advice for undo-tree-undo. Ah, I thought you meant manually. Still, I thought (org-reveal t) not to be convoluted, but to show the minimal amount,

Re: [O] undo-tree and Org visibility

Hi Samuel, Samuel Wales samolog...@gmail.com writes: Still, I thought (org-reveal t) not to be convoluted, but to show the minimal amount, which is the best workaround I know of. Is that not the case? Yes it is, and org-reveal will not display wrong ellispsis at the top of the window