"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 A, C & D are done. Work > can't start F until A & B are done. Would the TRIGGER/BLOCKER be okay for that (assuming we can use John's proposal of using lisp expressions and a set of predefined actions)? > Again, interesting, but different from where I was going. I'm not > after editing as a side effect. Just planning and organizing. In a > previous message you said it isn't as complex as package dependencies. > I guess what I was after might be. Yes. I thought allowing side effects (forward) and checks (backward) would be enough - for the sake of keeping implementation simple. Maybe this was just an over-reaction to the idea of GUID or labels, which sounds like we are going into trouble. -- 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
