Hi, > From: S K <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I agree. I too have some actions that don't need to 'become stale'. But > instead of the tagging > approach you have taken, I think it would be much better to add it as a > checkbox option.
Sure, except that is beyond my abilities. Another idea is to make the staleness settable per context, so some context could have a longer period before an action becomes stale than others. > If they are repeat actions, can't you just tag it 'bf' (or checkbox) as > before? No, when they appear they have to be fresh but should become stale when I leave them in the context. Tagging them 'bf' would prevent them becoming stale altogether. > From: "Reinier Balt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I'm wondering. Is this GTD-ish? I thought every action should be actionable. > If not, isn't it supposed to be on your someday/maybe? Or do you have > another use-case? The entire idea of staleness is not GTD-ish, I think. Except I consider it an improvement over GTD since it addresses procrastination, something that remains a weak point of GTD (in my opinion). Usually the actions that become stale have some kind of psychological block that I'm not aware of. See them become stale confronts me with that, which is good. SK and Reinier, thanks for the remarks. I would still like to get some pointers from a ruby-expert to how I should create a patch that deals with actions that come out of the tickler. Bye, Steven -- LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/zteven _______________________________________________ Tracks-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rousette.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/tracks-discuss
