Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@posteo.net> writes: > David Masterson <dsmaster...@gmail.com> writes: > >> The problem is (I think), when you attach @ or ! to the state and, as you >> cycle thru (S-right), new unintended notes will be added as you cycle to >> the state you're looking for. True? > > If you attach @ or !, those notes are not unintended. > S-right is not for you to play around, it is for actual work on actual > tasks. If you tell Org to take a note on switching to next TODO state, > that's what you want. If you don't want it, don't put @ or !.
Or cycling -- note taking is much more important and cycling only works for simple workflows. My previous example shows how easy it is to make a (by Org definition) "complex" workflow. I could probably use tags for changing states, but notes are not automatic. And you're using two things for essentially the same purpose (state transition). >> Can you repeat a keyword in org-todo-keywords? Perhaps there should be a >> sparse table defining, for a current state, what are the potential next >> states? ... > > No. S-right feature is there for simple workflows. I am against > introducing complex workflows for no reason. It will do no good for > the users. Complex workflows are rarely useful in practice, except > some specialized scenarios, which are not common enough to include > into the core. If org-todo-keywords has no sequence, does S-right cycle? I suppose I could shift to just types and tags and avoid S-right. Workflows can easily get complex -- just add WAIT and HOLD for example. > And yes, you can use org-edna or custom org-trigger-hook if you need > something non-orthodox. I'll have to explore org-edna more. I do think that the use of "sequence" in org-todo-keywords complicates the variable because it talks about "simple workflow" and leaves people wondering (like me) how to change their view of a workflow to fit Org. I'll play with it some more. -- David Masterson
