Re: [ANN] org-ql 0.4 released
On Saturday, January 25, 2020, Adam Porter wrote:
> I care about stability, not MELPA Stable. It's your choice to use MELPA
> Stable, and you're free to upgrade or downgrade individual packages to
> work around such occasional, temporary breakage caused by it--the pieces
> are yours to keep. I'm sorry for any inconvenience, but your config is
> up to you.
I'm making an extremely late reply, sorry.
It seems to me that this last statement ("Your config is up to you"), or
perhaps the point of view that produces it, is not self-evident when
applied to package versions. I think that in some way it's near the heart
of the controversy.
Maybe for me personally, my config being up to me (regarding package
versions) is a disadvantage. I gratefully make use of a number of packages
that I don't fully understand, and if I was required to study all of them
until I was confident that I *did* fully understand them before installing,
I'd just give up using Emacs at all.
I don't think there's likely to be any person who uses all of the packages
offered in the list. It appears to me that there are sort of "interest
groups" of Emacs users, where members of each group tend to all install,
use, and collectively debug a similar subset of what's available. I've
discovered that if I install the packages that are most popular among the
org-mode group, Emacs does what I want and everything seems to work. A sort
of de facto "group curation system", that has created a sort of unofficial
ad-hoc "org-mode group consensus distro of Emacs".
--
David
--
David Rogers
Re: Org export to HTML with encrypted information ??
On Thursday, November 28, 2019, David Masterson wrote: > My use-case is this: > > I'd like to use Org to write up *all* the information about my family > life (so to speak) including medical histories of my family, issues with > the house, bank accounts, financial information, etc., so that my family > has all the information to refer to when necessary in a (hopefully) > well-structured form. Naturally, this is going to have a fair amount of > really sensitive information. By carefully outlining the information, I > can structure the sensitive information to be in key parts of the > documents that I can then encrypt using org-crypt. > > That part is straightforward. The tricky part is that my family is not > "Emacs literate" and, so, I'm thinking the best idea is to export the > information from Org files to HTML files so that I can then present to > them as a website. They are used to browsing the web, so this should be > more natural to them. The problem that I'm looking for help with is how > to deal with the encrypted information? Any suggestions? > I'd very strongly suggest that this question about sensitive information be 100% handled by handwritten paper documents stored in a safe-deposit box. Don't allow digital-anything to become involved, at any step. Non-sensitive information: Do whatever you like. -- -- David Rogers
Fwd: Properties Drawer versus tags
-- Forwarded message -- From: David R Date: Thursday, December 19, 2019 Subject: Properties Drawer versus tags To: Lawrence Bottorff On Thursday, December 19, 2019, Lawrence Bottorff wrote: > Very simple, largely philosophical question: When/why use a properties drawer below a heading versus just using tags on the heading? What are the advantages, disadvantages of both? > LB At the most basic level, the difference is simple: Properties connect two ideas, while tags are each a single idea. Properties often show a category along with a fact that belongs in that category, such as "Book type" - "Fiction". If you have several categories that continually come up, and those categories will have various facts tied to them, then you probably want properties. But if the categories are inconsistent from item to item, or if the categories don't matter and you only need the individual facts, then tags may make more sense. And there's nothing to stop you from using both. -- David Rogers -- -- David Rogers
Re: Properties Drawer versus tags
I forgot something important, part of "the case in favor of properties": It's sometimes useful to be able to search for a category or sort by a category. It's harder to do that if you haven't explicitly entered that category anywhere. -- -- David Rogers
Re: Can Org warn me if I create a time conflict?
A quick test has proved to me that org-conflict is able to do exactly what I want it to - in fact, it's much better than I had imagined, with useful features I hadn't thought of. Now, if I turn out to be smart enough to make it run properly on all my Org files, I'll be extremely happy with the result. (So far, I've only tried the demo file provided by the author.) If you want to test it, you need to install a single .el file, add 2 or 3 lines to your init file, and temporarily add the author's demonstration file to your org-agenda-files. The test is nicely laid out and simple to use, in a "Here, press this button and watch what happens" sort of way. (Not literally, but I think you know what I mean.) Very easy to remove again if you don't like it - but I do like it. -- -- David Rogers
Re: Can Org warn me if I create a time conflict?
On Wednesday, December 18, 2019, Mikhail Skorzhinskiy wrote: > I think there is a package exactly for this: > > https://www.mail-archive.com/emacs-orgmode@gnu.org/msg123154.html > > I'm happily using this since summer with latest org. Although in case you want to extend scheduling function (ie check it automatically) you need to write write some code around. > > I can send you my customizations on top of that package, but at the end of the week, im in vacation currently. > > -- > Mikhail Skorzhinskiy > mskorzhins...@eml.cc I haven't had a chance to try this yet, but the description sounds like what I want. I'll try it for sure. Thanks! -- -- David Rogers
