pete phillips wrote:
I genuinely think that if there is a band of org-moders (hmmm we could
do with a cooler collective noun I think ?)
How about ORG-MONGERS?
Charles
___
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to
Charles Cave [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
How about ORG-MONGERS?
Org-wonks!
--
Bastien
___
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
Carsten Dominik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
First, let me say that I was surprised that quite a few people are so keen
to see this kind of features. I myself would worry a lot about spending
more time to set up and maintain these connections, than I would be saving
by using them. And I am not
pete phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
org-mode developed as a means of maintaining lists, and it excels at
this. Just because the GTD methodology uses the term Project doesn't
mean that we should turn org-mode into a fully fledged project
planning application. If you need project planning
Eddward DeVilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's hard to 'address' a todo item.
Not that hard: [[*Test%20headline]]
Link's might be the best thing we have for that.
Exactly! And what if the text of the link could also store the todo
state value of its target (when both relevant and
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 01:44:11PM +0100, Bastien wrote:
Eddward DeVilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
It's hard to 'address' a todo item.
Not that hard: [[*Test%20headline]]
How does that work to address this case?
* Hardware
** TODO Install
* Software
** TODO Install :ADDRESSTHISONE:
*
Hi everyone,
I have read this discussion with great interest, and I would like to
add a few thoughts.
First, let me say that I was surprised that quite a few people are so
keen to see this kind of features. I myself would worry
a lot about spending more time to set up and maintain these
Carsten Dominik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I have read this discussion with great interest, and I would like to
add a few thoughts.
I guess some of us were waiting for that -- thanks for sorting this
out :)
First, let me say that I was surprised that quite a few people are so
keen to see
Carsten == Carsten Dominik [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Carsten First, let me say that I was surprised that quite a few
Carsten people are so keen to see this kind of features. I myself
Carsten would worry a lot about spending more time to set up and
Carsten maintain these
Hey,
I'm new here but I have to say that I totally agree with Pete.
Why not just work on integration with popular project management
tools? e.g export to Jira, Trac, ...
(btw, syncing todos with Trac tickets would really come handy :)
Sebastjan
On 10/11/07, pete phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Russell == Russell Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russell however you must realize that a tool meant to maintain
Russell personal lists of items may eventually grow to encompass
Russell larger projects.
:-)
I do realise this. But the question that needs to be answered
is whether
On Thu, Oct 11, 2007 at 06:10:50PM +0100, pete phillips wrote:
I do realise this. But the question that needs to be answered
is whether this is necessarily the best path ?
It isn't necessarily. I'm just pointing out it's likely to grow as
more folks use it for larger lists. After all, most PM
Russell Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think the key here is that Org needs some PM-like functionality, but
I certainly wouldn't advocate trying to make Org a full PM. Org is
great for lists, notes, TODO's, etc. Ever try to take freeform notes
in MS Project? ;]
I'm interested to see
Russell == Russell Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Russell It isn't necessarily. I'm just pointing out it's likely to
Russell grow as more folks use it for larger lists. After all, most
Russell PM software just maintains a specialized kind of list.
Russell Yes I've looked at
Eddward DeVilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
If org becomes popular enough that people pass data around in it, then
it could be more of an issue. Especially since I think the triggers
would be in drawers which are all always hidden unless you go and
explicitly open each one.
The pool of
Eddward DeVilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I'm not really trying to deal with linear C depends and B which
depends on A type things. Those are easy. I don't really need org to
change the states for me.
Okay, but this was Rainer initial request.
It's more like, work can't even begin E until
Russell Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
As to Gantt, lets just dump trees into Graphviz!
Gantt charts could be achieved with TRIGGER/BLOCKER, trees would
requires GUID and labels. Am I right?
--
Bastien
___
Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember:
On Oct 8, 2007, at 22:12, Russell Adams wrote:
I don't use links often... If I could have a link to another TODO
item, but have the visible portion of the link display the status of
the target TODO item.
Ie:
* Things to do in reverse order
** TODO One
** TODO Two
** DONE Three
*
Hi!
Having a TODO which depends on an earlier TODO I would like to trigger the
timestamped scheduling of
the following TODO when the former is DONE.
How do you folks handle such dependencies?
Could any automatic process be implemented?
* TODO job 1
SCHEDULED: 2007-10-12 Fr
* TODO job 2
On 10/8/07, Rainer Stengele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi!
Having a TODO which depends on an earlier TODO I would like to trigger the
timestamped scheduling of
the following TODO when the former is DONE.
I second this request. I often like to schedule a workflow where task
A must precede B
I know I'm replying to myself, but I had an idea.
If a link could show the state of a linked TODO, that would make for a
good visualization. I could then follow the link and just adjust my
order to account for dependencies. It sounds like a more permanent
agenda view that you could edit to get
I've been waiting to see if org might develop something like todo
dependency ordering. Seems like one could use this with and estimated
time to complete a todo item to generate a milestone table or more
easily estimate how long a group of tasks will require to complete or
when the soonest a
Adam Spiers [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
- if A changes to DONE, change B from BLOCKED to NEXT
(this is the obvious one)
- if A changes to DONE, change B from NEXT to CANCELLED
(if only A or B needs to be done, not both)
There must be others people can think of easily.
Updating
Eddward DeVilla [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
My only real issue is that I tend to think of task dependencies in
terms of the other tasks a given task is waiting on rather than what
other tasks are waiting on a given task.
Ok, then:
* Task A
* Task B
:PROPERTIES:
:TODO: {TODO 'previous
On 10/8/07, John Wiegley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How about just having generalized Lisp triggers:
[snip]
This could be dangerous. Org file are (most) text. The more code you
allow to be embedded, the more of a vector org-mode becomes for trojan
horse attacks. Of course I've been using lisp
On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 10:35:33PM -0500, Eddward DeVilla wrote:
On 10/8/07, Russell Adams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In projects, my sections are
- quick info -- a table with things like defect or request
tracking info, start date, estimated time, date testing begins and
date actually
26 matches
Mail list logo
