Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Alan, Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: Thank you for the opportunity. I've been getting spoiled by the use of github (to track issues, and to have documentation at the same place than the code). I'm wondering if there is a way to have the code both on github and in the contrib directory. Is there any current package doing it? No. And that's why I'm considering the migration of contributed packages into a new Org ELPA, where sync'ing the Org ELPA package from another repository would be possible. A win-win situation for everyone. Regarding the documentation, by the way, where should one put it for contrb packages? On worg? Yes. You can even add documentation for stuff that is not in contrib but available on github or on some other repository service. It will get exposure when we announce it for the upcoming 8.3 release. This is an important matter to take into account indeed :) -- Bastien
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Bastien, On 2014-05-21 14:08, Bastien b...@gnu.org writes: Thank you for the opportunity. I've been getting spoiled by the use of github (to track issues, and to have documentation at the same place than the code). I'm wondering if there is a way to have the code both on github and in the contrib directory. Is there any current package doing it? No. And that's why I'm considering the migration of contributed packages into a new Org ELPA, where sync'ing the Org ELPA package from another repository would be possible. A win-win situation for everyone. I've thought about this and I will try to go the ELPA route. Even if it means less exposure, it seems to be conceptually closer to my vision of this package (an add-on that does not need to add to the already huge git repository). Regarding the documentation, by the way, where should one put it for contrb packages? On worg? Yes. You can even add documentation for stuff that is not in contrib but available on github or on some other repository service. It makes sense. I'll add writing a tutorial on worg on my todo list. Thanks, Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Bastien, On 2014-05-15 12:07, Bastien b...@gnu.org writes: Hi Alan, Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I need to learn how to do this. In the meantime, I've put the code on github: https://github.com/brabalan/org-review Since the big secret plan to move contrib/ files to Org ELPA is not yet to happen, and since it may take time for you to add org-review to GNU ELPA, I simply suggest you add this file to contrib/. Thank you for the opportunity. I've been getting spoiled by the use of github (to track issues, and to have documentation at the same place than the code). I'm wondering if there is a way to have the code both on github and in the contrib directory. Is there any current package doing it? Regarding the documentation, by the way, where should one put it for contrb packages? On worg? It will get exposure when we announce it for the upcoming 8.3 release. This is an important matter to take into account indeed Thanks, Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Alan, Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I need to learn how to do this. In the meantime, I've put the code on github: https://github.com/brabalan/org-review Since the big secret plan to move contrib/ files to Org ELPA is not yet to happen, and since it may take time for you to add org-review to GNU ELPA, I simply suggest you add this file to contrib/. It will get exposure when we announce it for the upcoming 8.3 release. Up to you! Thanks, -- Bastien
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Alan, Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: On 2014-04-25 10:02, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I guess I should have asked: who decides what goes in contrib? The Org maintainer. Another option is to turn it into an ELPA package. I need to learn how to do this. See http://savannah.gnu.org/git/?group=emacs You clone the ELPA repository: git clone membername@git.sv.gnu.org:/srv/git/emacs/elpa.git Then add your package. elpa.git contains some documentation. -- Bastien
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Alexander, On 2014-04-28 09:20, AW alexander.will...@t-online.de writes: Am Sonntag, 27. April 2014, 10:09:35 schrieb Alan Schmitt: On 2014-04-25 10:02, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I guess I should have asked: who decides what goes in contrib? The Org maintainer. Another option is to turn it into an ELPA package. I need to learn how to do this. In the meantime, I've put the code on github: https://github.com/brabalan/org-review Alan I'm really interessted in a more sophisticated review system than to put REVIEW on the list of TODO | DONE items. I guess you are having a good point here and your code will improve orgmode. But after reading your initial post and the README on github I'm not sure how to use your code. Could you complete your Example in the README, please? I've just expanded on the README. Please let me know if you have additional questions. 1. Probably -- sorry, I'm lacking of lisp understanding -- we need to put the file org-review.el into a place where Emacs can find it. Yes. 2. It is probably necessary to add (require 'org-review) before the code in the example into the .emacs file, or am I wrong? Yes, it is necessary. 3. Usually people have something like #+TODO: TODO INPUT ASK MAYBE | DONE in their org-file or an equivalent in their .emacs file. What will happen to such customisations? Nothing. Review tracking is done using properties, not keywords. Best, Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
On 2014-04-25 10:02, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I guess I should have asked: who decides what goes in contrib? The Org maintainer. Another option is to turn it into an ELPA package. I need to learn how to do this. In the meantime, I've put the code on github: https://github.com/brabalan/org-review Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
On 2014-04-26 14:25, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: Thorsten Jolitz tjol...@gmail.com writes: the answer is in the quote already: ,- | Since return value matters, I suggest to use ... `- Exactly. I use `when' if side-effects are involved or if the code is too long and doesn't fit nicely in a `and' branch. Of course, this is nitpicking. There's nothing wrong with `when' variant. I think I get it now. Thanks a lot. Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Nicolas, I've changed all of these, and I will keep testing it over the next few days. I have one question remaining, though. On 2014-04-25 08:51, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: (if (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) This is a matter of taste, but I find one-armed `if' a bit confusing. Since return value matters, I suggest to use (and (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) Why not use (when (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) instead of and here? Thanks, Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: Hi Nicolas, I've changed all of these, and I will keep testing it over the next few days. I have one question remaining, though. On 2014-04-25 08:51, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: (if (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) This is a matter of taste, but I find one-armed `if' a bit confusing. Since return value matters, I suggest to use (and (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) Why not use (when (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) instead of and here? the answer is in the quote already: ,- | Since return value matters, I suggest to use ... `- -- cheers, Thorsten
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Thorsten Jolitz tjol...@gmail.com writes: the answer is in the quote already: ,- | Since return value matters, I suggest to use ... `- Exactly. I use `when' if side-effects are involved or if the code is too long and doesn't fit nicely in a `and' branch. Of course, this is nitpicking. There's nothing wrong with `when' variant. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hello, Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I changed the date. As I signed the FSF paper, do I need to change the name as well and put mine? For contrib/ directory, you can assign copyright to your name. I attach the new version. Thanks. A few minor comments follow. I would like to propose to add this to the contrib directory, but I don't know the procedure to submit this code. You simply copy the file in the contrib/lisp/ directory, edit contrib/README and edit `org-modules' defcustom in org.el. ;; Example use. ;; Trailing whitespace. ;; 1 - To display the things to review in the agenda. ;; Ditto. (defun org-review-last-planned (last delay) Computes the next planned review, given the LAST review date (in string format) and the review DELAY (in string format). (let* ((lt (org-read-date nil t last)) (ct (current-time))) Plain `let' is sufficient here. (time-add lt (time-subtract (org-read-date nil t delay) ct (defun org-review-last-review-prop () Return the value of the last review property of the current headline. (let ((lr-prop org-review-last-property-name)) (org-entry-get (point) lr-prop))) The `let' seems useless. I think (org-entry-get (point) org-review-last-property-name) is simple enough. (defun org-review-toreview-p () Check if the entry at point should be marked for review. Return nil if the entry does not need to be reviewed. Otherwise return the number of days between the past planned review date and today. If there is no last review date, return nil. If there is no review delay period, use `org-review-delay'. (let* ((lr-prop org-review-last-property-name) (lp (org-entry-get (point) lr-prop))) I suggest to use your own function: (let ((lp (org-review-last-review-prop))) ...) (when lp Trailing whitespace. (let* ((dr-prop org-review-delay-property-name) (dr (or (org-entry-get (point) dr-prop t) org-review-delay)) Trailing whitespace. Also I suggest to merge DR and DR-PROP: (let* ((dr (or (org-entry-GET (point) org-review-delay-property-name t) org-review-delay)) ...)) (nt (org-review-last-planned lp dr)) ) Dangling parenthesis. (if (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) This is a matter of taste, but I find one-armed `if' a bit confusing. Since return value matters, I suggest to use (and (time-less-p nt (current-time)) nt) (defun org-review-insert-last-review (optional prompt) Insert the current date as last review. If prefix argument: prompt the user for the date. (interactive P) (let* ((ts (if prompt (concat (org-read-date) ) (format-time-string (car org-time-stamp-formats) (save-excursion I don't think this `save-excursion' is needed. (org-entry-put (if (equal (buffer-name) org-agenda-buffer-name) (or (org-get-at-bol 'org-marker) (org-agenda-error)) (point)) org-review-last-property-name (cond Trailing whitespace. ((equal org-review-timestamp-format 'inactive) `eq' should be used when comparing symbols. (concat [ (substring ts 1 -1) ])) ((equal org-review-timestamp-format 'active) Ditto. ts) (t (substring ts 1 -1))) (defun org-review-skip () Skip entries that are not scheduled to be reviewed. (save-restriction (widen) (let ((next-headline (save-excursion (or (outline-next-heading) (point-max) (cond ((org-review-toreview-p) nil) (t next-headline) This function doesn't move point (so it skips nothing), is it expected? Also, I think `save-restriction' + `widen' is only useful for `outline-next-heading'. And `save-restriction' + `save-excursion' + `widen' = `org-with-wide-buffer'. You may want to rewrite it to something like: (defun org-review-skip () Skip entries that are not scheduled to be reviewed. (and (not (org-review-toreview-p)) (org-with-wide-buffer (or (outline-next-heading) (point) Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Nicolas, Thanks a lot for these very helpful comments. I'll take them into account. I have a couple questions of my own now. On 2014-04-25 08:51, Nicolas Goaziou n.goaz...@gmail.com writes: I would like to propose to add this to the contrib directory, but I don't know the procedure to submit this code. You simply copy the file in the contrib/lisp/ directory, edit contrib/README and edit `org-modules' defcustom in org.el. I guess I should have asked: who decides what goes in contrib? Is this mature/useful enough to be included? If so, I'll edit these as you suggest. ;; Example use. ;; Trailing whitespace. After this many violations, I've added #+begin_src emacs-lisp (setq-default show-trailing-whitespace t) #+end_src to my configuration ;-) (defun org-review-insert-last-review (optional prompt) Insert the current date as last review. If prefix argument: prompt the user for the date. (interactive P) (let* ((ts (if prompt (concat (org-read-date) ) (format-time-string (car org-time-stamp-formats) (save-excursion I don't think this `save-excursion' is needed. Indeed. I copied this from org-expiry. Looking at the code for `org-entry-put', I see that it uses `org-with-point' that also uses save-excursion inside. (defun org-review-skip () Skip entries that are not scheduled to be reviewed. (save-restriction (widen) (let ((next-headline (save-excursion (or (outline-next-heading) (point-max) (cond ((org-review-toreview-p) nil) (t next-headline) This function doesn't move point (so it skips nothing), is it expected? It works, so I guess it's not supposed to move the point. It's to be used with `org-agenda-skip-function', which says: ,--- | Function to be called at each match during agenda construction. | If this function returns nil, the current match should not be skipped. | Otherwise, the function must return a position from where the search | should be continued. `--- Thanks again, Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: I guess I should have asked: who decides what goes in contrib? The Org maintainer. Another option is to turn it into an ELPA package. Is this mature/useful enough to be included? If so, I'll edit these as you suggest. It seems useful. Maturity is not a problem since you have write access to the repo. Anyway, Bastien will give you the definitive answer. After this many violations, I've added #+begin_src emacs-lisp (setq-default show-trailing-whitespace t) #+end_src to my configuration ;-) FWIW, I use `whitespace-mode' instead. It works, so I guess it's not supposed to move the point. It's to be used with `org-agenda-skip-function', which says: ,--- | Function to be called at each match during agenda construction. | If this function returns nil, the current match should not be skipped. | Otherwise, the function must return a position from where the search | should be continued. `--- Then I suggest to explain it in the docstring (both the return value and that it will be used as `org-agenda-skip-function' value). Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Bastien, On 2014-04-19 10:14, Bastien b...@gnu.org writes: Hi Alan, thanks for sharing -- some comments: - you need to update the copyright of the file; I changed the date. As I signed the FSF paper, do I need to change the name as well and put mine? - example code in section 3 of the header is mangled; I removed that example; it should not be in the file. - there are some dangling parentheses; Are those parentheses on a line by themselves? I could not find them. - use (get-text-property (point-min) ...) instead of (get-text-property 1 ...) Changed. - I'd use org-review instead of org-review-schedule as prefix; Changed. - maybe you can use naked timestamps like 2014-04-19 sam. instead of inactive ones, this way using [ in the agenda will not create false positives by inserting entries with a REVIEW property. This is now the case by default, with an option to have inactive or active time stamps. - I infer from a quick read that this works for the agenda but I guess this could work for both the agenda and Org buffers; It depends what this means ;-) My goal was to use it in an agenda view, but most of the functionality does not depend on it. Since you took inspirationg from org-expiry, I guess some of the comments above would apply there too... feel free to hack into this directions for both org-expiry.el and org-review.el! Actually, maybe both should be merged somehow, since expiring is just reviewing entries to interactively delete them. I'm still not sure where to take this ... I agree both are cases of adding dates to entries and doing things according to those dates, but I still need to think more about how to generalize it to cover both cases. I attach the new version. I would like to propose to add this to the contrib directory, but I don't know the procedure to submit this code. Thanks, Alan org-review.el Description: application/emacs-lisp
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Alan, thanks for sharing -- some comments: - you need to update the copyright of the file; - example code in section 3 of the header is mangled; - there are some dangling parentheses; - use (get-text-property (point-min) ...) instead of (get-text-property 1 ...) - I'd use org-review instead of org-review-schedule as prefix; - maybe you can use naked timestamps like 2014-04-19 sam. instead of inactive ones, this way using [ in the agenda will not create false positives by inserting entries with a REVIEW property. - I infer from a quick read that this works for the agenda but I guess this could work for both the agenda and Org buffers; Since you took inspirationg from org-expiry, I guess some of the comments above would apply there too... feel free to hack into this directions for both org-expiry.el and org-review.el! Actually, maybe both should be merged somehow, since expiring is just reviewing entries to interactively delete them. Thanks for this! -- Bastien
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Hi Bastien, Thanks a lot for these, I'll look into them. I have a couple questions in the meantime. On 2014-04-19 10:14, Bastien b...@gnu.org writes: - maybe you can use naked timestamps like 2014-04-19 sam. instead of inactive ones, this way using [ in the agenda will not create false positives by inserting entries with a REVIEW property. OK. I'm not sure what [ is supposed to do in the agenda, and I don't see how it could interfere. (I like inactive time stamps because I can easily adjust their dates with C-left and C-right, is it possible to do so with naked timestamps?) - I infer from a quick read that this works for the agenda but I guess this could work for both the agenda and Org buffers; Yes, clearly. Since you took inspirationg from org-expiry, I guess some of the comments above would apply there too... feel free to hack into this directions for both org-expiry.el and org-review.el! Actually, maybe both should be merged somehow, since expiring is just reviewing entries to interactively delete them. Yes. But I should think about it more to see where I could take this. Thanks again, Alan
Re: [O] org-review-schedule
Alan Schmitt alan.schm...@polytechnique.org writes: - maybe you can use naked timestamps like 2014-04-19 sam. instead of inactive ones, this way using [ in the agenda will not create false positives by inserting entries with a REVIEW property. OK. I'm not sure what [ is supposed to do in the agenda, and I don't see how it could interfere. It includes headlines with an inactive timestamp in the agenda. So if you have a property :REVIEW_DELAY: [Inactive timestamp] this headline will be show in the agenda if the timestamp matches. (I like inactive time stamps because I can easily adjust their dates with C-left and C-right, is it possible to do so with naked timestamps?) Well... no. Of course you can simply use inactive timestamps and advice users not to include them in the agenda. Yes. But I should think about it more to see where I could take this. Thanks in advance! -- Bastien
[O] org-review-schedule
Hello, I've just finished writing a little bit of code that allows the scheduling of reviews. The basic idea is that every task that is supposed to be reviewed has a LAST_REVIEW property (a date when the task / project was last reviewed), and optionally a REVIEW_DELAY property (with a configurable default value). If the current date is after LAST_REVIEW + REVIEW_DELAY, then the task is considered up to review. I've written a small function to show these tasks in the agenda, and a sorting function to allow them to be sorted from this had to be review so long ago to this has just been available to review. Another function allows to set the LAST_REVIEW property to the current date (or a chosen date if called with C-u). I attach the code. It's the first time I'm contributing something like this, so I don't really know how to do it. The header of the file is basically the same one as from `contrib/org-expiry.el', and I tried to keep a similar structure. Please don't hesitate to comment criticize the code, I'm still learning my way around emacs-lisp and org-mode. Thanks, Alan org-review-schedule.el Description: application/emacs-lisp
