Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep 16, 2007, at 23:53, Bastien wrote:
>
>> Cezar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> Forgot to load the 5.09 version, I was still using the old one,
>>> sorry ! It's working great.
>>
>> And I like this feature very much!
>>
>> I stopped using the l
Hi,
The only restriction is that you no longer can use "@" as a
selection character for fast TODO selection.
This seems perfectly acceptable to me. Just a question though:
what will happen if a user type '@' in the fast todo selection ?
Will it bug at us ?
Xavier
--
http://www.gnu
On Sep 16, 2007, at 23:53, Bastien wrote:
> Cezar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Forgot to load the 5.09 version, I was still using the old one,
>> sorry ! It's working great.
>
> And I like this feature very much!
>
> I stopped using the lognotestate option because
On Sep 16, 2007, at 23:53, Bastien wrote:
Cezar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Forgot to load the 5.09 version, I was still using the old one,
sorry ! It's working great.
And I like this feature very much!
I stopped using the lognotestate option because it populated my buffer
with too many n
Cezar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Forgot to load the 5.09 version, I was still using the old one,
> sorry ! It's working great.
And I like this feature very much!
I stopped using the lognotestate option because it populated my buffer
with too many notes, certainly because I had too many states
Bastien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Cezar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> #+SEQ_TODO: TODO WAITING(@) | DONE
> #+STARTUP: lognotestate
>>
>> Which version would that be ?I am using 5.09 and it's not yet working.
>
> Working here with Org 5.09.
>
> Maybe you forgot to compile and load the
Cezar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
#+SEQ_TODO: TODO WAITING(@) | DONE
#+STARTUP: lognotestate
>
> Which version would that be ?I am using 5.09 and it's not yet working.
Working here with Org 5.09.
Maybe you forgot to compile and load the latest org.el file?
Or maybe you forgot to updat
Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>> This will be possible in the next version with
>>>
>>> #+SEQ_TODO: TODO WAITING(@) | DONE
>>> #+STARTUP: lognotestate
Which version would that be ?I am using 5.09 and it's not yet working.
Best regards,
Cezar
Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep 14, 2007, at 19:56, Bernt Hansen wrote:
>
>> Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>>> On Sep 1, 2007, at 9:46, Cezar wrote:
I would like to record some comments JUST on certain states,
for example I want to mark a task
On Sep 14, 2007, at 19:56, Bernt Hansen wrote:
Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
On Sep 1, 2007, at 9:46, Cezar wrote:
I would like to record some comments JUST on certain states,
for example I want to mark a task as WAITING and give it a reason,
or the "thing" I am waiting for.
Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep 1, 2007, at 9:46, Cezar wrote:
>>
>> I would like to record some comments JUST on certain states,
>> for example I want to mark a task as WAITING and give it a reason,
>> or the "thing" I am waiting for.
>
> This will be possible in the next v
On 2007-09-05 22:43 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> Is there a similar one to todo? I haven't found
>> it though.
>
> There is org-use-fast-todo-selection, but setting it to t does not yet
> really force letters for all keywords, you still need to have configured
> at least one key. This is a-sym
On Sep 5, 2007, at 22:13, Leo wrote:
On 2007-09-05 16:43 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
Yes
(setg org-use-fast-tag-selection t)
- Carsten
But this is only tags.
Yes, I was talking about tags all the time.
Is there a similar one to todo? I haven't found
it though.
There is org-use-fast
On 2007-09-05 16:43 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> Yes
>
> (setg org-use-fast-tag-selection t)
>
> - Carsten
But this is only tags. Is there a similar one to todo? I haven't found
it though.
--
Leo (GPG Key: 9283AA3F)
Gnus is one component of the Emacs operating system.
Yes
(setg org-use-fast-tag-selection t)
- Carsten
On Sep 5, 2007, at 17:23, Leo wrote:
On 2007-09-05 11:23 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
You need to define at least one shortcut, Org-mode will assign the
rest.
Granted, the algorithm could be a lot better, but it does it.
- Carsten
Can we
On 2007-09-05 04:28 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>>'C-n' and 'C-p' can move to the next/previous todo state
>>
>>The arrow indicates the current state.
>
> I don't think it is even necessary, to mark the current state.
> This is important for tags because of inheritance, and because you
>
On 2007-09-05 11:23 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
> You need to define at least one shortcut, Org-mode will assign the rest.
> Granted, the algorithm could be a lot better, but it does it.
>
> - Carsten
Can we remove the 'at least one shortcut' limitation?
--
Leo (GPG Key: 9283AA
On 2007-09-05 04:32 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> Here is another suggestion: why not restrict the fast selection to TODO
>> keywords when the point is at TODO keywords, and to tags when the point
>> is on tags?
>
> Definitely a NO. Who would want to move the cursor before setting
> tags???
I
You need to define at least one shortcut, Org-mode will assign the rest.
Granted, the algorithm could be a lot better, but it does it.
- Carsten
On Sep 5, 2007, at 12:06, Leo wrote:
On 2007-09-05 04:28 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
make an user option to swap C-c C-t and C-u C-c C-t i.e.
On 2007-09-05 04:28 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> make an user option to swap C-c C-t and C-u C-c C-t i.e. C-c C-t
>> cycle through todo states
>>
>> automatically shortcut for todos:
>> - if it is specified by user then use it
>> - otherwise, use the first letter of the na
Carsten Dominik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Here is another suggestion: why not restrict the fast selection to TODO
>> keywords when the point is at TODO keywords, and to tags when the point
>> is on tags?
>
> Definitely a NO. Who would want to move the cursor before setting
> tags???
I meant:
On Sep 4, 2007, at 18:43, Bastien wrote:
Leo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Using tags to setup todo looks unclean to me. However it is very nice
to
be able to set up todo using an interface similar to tags.
And since the argument to org-todo has become completely useless
because
of this fea
On Sep 3, 2007, at 21:56, Leo wrote:
On 2007-09-03 19:32 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
Yes, since 5.07, you can mis-use the TAGS interface to directly
switch to TODO states. Check the release notes.
Is this temporary until a better solution is found?
Not at all, I really cannot think of a
Leo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Using tags to setup todo looks unclean to me. However it is very nice to
> be able to set up todo using an interface similar to tags.
>
> And since the argument to org-todo has become completely useless because
> of this feature. I propose the following:
>
> C
On 2007-09-03 17:25 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> I would like to record some comments JUST on certain states,
>> for example I want to mark a task as WAITING and give it a reason,
>> or the "thing" I am waiting for.
>
> This is currently not possible. Are there more people
On 2007-09-03 19:32 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>>> Yes, since 5.07, you can mis-use the TAGS interface to directly
>>> switch to TODO states. Check the release notes.
>>
>> Is this temporary until a better solution is found?
>
> Not at all, I really cannot think of a better solution.
> The only
On Sep 3, 2007, at 19:35, Leo wrote:
On 2007-09-03 17:25 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
Also is it possible to get to a state without cycling, and have
the loggining feature mentioned above ?
Yes, since 5.07, you can mis-use the TAGS interface to directly
switch to TODO states. Check the rel
On 2007-09-03 17:25 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> Also is it possible to get to a state without cycling, and have
>> the loggining feature mentioned above ?
>
> Yes, since 5.07, you can mis-use the TAGS interface to directly
> switch to TODO states. Check the release notes.
Is this temporary u
On 2007-09-03 17:25 +0100, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> I would like to record some comments JUST on certain states,
>> for example I want to mark a task as WAITING and give it a reason,
>> or the "thing" I am waiting for.
>
> This is currently not possible. Are there more people who would
> find t
29 matches
Mail list logo
