Tom Prince <tom.pri...@ualberta.net> wrote: > On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 23:13:11 -0500, Nick Dokos <nicholas.do...@hp.com> wrote: > > Not worth the bother IMO[fn:1], but if you wish to implement it and submit > > a patch, I'd be happy to review it. > > > > Nick > > > > Footnotes: > > > > [fn:1] Remember, capture is supposed to be as unobtrusive as possible: > > you just want to squirrel away something for future > > reference. Bells and whistles (which, IMO, this change would be) > > are not the point: you want to get in, record the data and get > > out and back to work as fast as possible. Popping up frames slows > > things down but more importantly jolts you away from what you > > were doing. At least, it would me (I think): that's why I don't > > think it's worth it, but you may very well disagree. > > It isn't worth *if* capture is invoked from emacs. If capture is invoked > from org-protocol in firefox, then there might not even be a emacs frame > visible. >
<OT rant> org-protocol is below my horizon :-) I had gotten it working a long time ago, then something happened in ff and broke it, I fixed it, they broke it again and at some point I gave up: every time I had to fix it, I had to go back and relearn everything (it's not as if I live and breathe ff arcana) and do a few hours' worth of research and then try a few dozen times, tweaking this and that because all the instructions were either outdated or inconsistent - if "they" are not respectful enough of the thousands of people that used the feature that they broke and not cognizant of the pain they produce, I will not use their damn feature. Similar remarks apply to the "improvements" of Unity and Gnome 3: a plague a' both their houses. All I need the damn desktop to do is open emacs when I click on the icon and give me enough workspaces for my needs (which vary). I'd rather do cut-n-paste than waste another second on org-protocol (mind you, it's not org-protocol's problem: it's the other side that breaks - but without the other side, org-protocol is almost useless). Ah, I feel better now... </OT rant> > 1) If I don't pass -c to emacsclient, then I need to search all my > workspaces to find where emacs decided to put the capture frame > 2) If I pass do pass -c to emacsclient, then I need to close the frame > afterwards. And more significantly, I need to close the empty frame > when I use store-link instead. (I could work around this by using > seperate protocols for for each) > Sounds like a worthwhile thing to fix - patches would probably be welcome. Nick
