Re: [off-topic/GTD]Only Next Actions list to rule them all ?

From: Marcelo de Moraes Serpa <celoserpa@gmail.com>
To: Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca>
Cc: Org Mode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [off-topic/GTD]Only Next Actions list to rule them all ?
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 13:06:28 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1e5bcefd0910211106n62424599h61eb8374982f92da@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y6n57x7l.fsf@gollum.intra.norang.ca>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4634 bytes --]

Thanks for the replies.

I can see the value of having project lists with its actions beneath (and
sub-projects), but I don't have the discipline or maybe not enough org
skills to use it efficiently.

Having one project list that *lists only projects* (outcomes that require
more than one action to be considered a reality) and another single stack of
Next Actions has its benefits. The first one, being a cleaner list and
simplicity.

In the process phase, you process your blob of "stuff", and when you get to
the point in the workflow where you have to decide if its a project or an
actual next action, then you can decide where to put it, *two lits to choose
from*.

The next actions can have the context tags, and the project list all have
the PROJECT tag. No more, no less.

Later on, in the planning phase, you can then generate more actions to crank
up in the list of actions.

So, you need to act on, just check the Next Actions list. Review the
projects lists whenever you feel to, to check for completed outcomes, need
to filter by context, use the agenda view. In the weekly review, check the
inbasket and someday/maybe, project lists and next actions, process,
organize, rise and repeat. Project lists and next actions lists refreshed
and ready to rock again. That's all.

As a side-benefit, having a cleaner text-file is good.

The other option, of having a Projects list, with projects then next actions
mixed up, has its benefits, since when using tagging properly you can
differentiate between Next Actions and Projects using org search features.
However, in the agenda view I won't have any clue of to which project the
TODO belongs, so, I lost the project information there, unless I turn follow
mode on or follow this item (<enter>, mouse-click), then I find that there
are too many items and hierarchies when I follow the items, it just gets too
cluttered for me, too confusing.

Also, one of the reasons I tried to simplify was that I was spending too
much time adjusting it and little time actually using it :S

I haven't stopped and I will keep studying better ways to do GTD and
automate more of my system, but this will be in the someday/maybe now.

I will create a section on Worg on different implementations of systems with
org based on the GTD model, then we could list the pros and cons, relate to
other productivity models and make a good menu to serve as reference for us
or as a great menu for new users.

Anyway, two different approaches that are both good, depends on how your
mind works and your level of knowledge of GTD/org.

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 7:22 AM, Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:

> Manish <mailtomanish.sharma@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Marcelo de Moraes Serpa wrote:
> >> Hello list,
> >>
> >> This is for the GTD orgers out there. I've taken the article written by
> >> Charles as a basis for my GTD implementation. In the end, it's all about
> >> what works for you, but I'd like to get some insights/opinions from you:
> For
> >> Next Actions, are you using a single list OR you organize them
> >> hierarchically under each project (in the projects list)?
> >>
> >> I started with the second one, putting each next action (TODO) item
> under
> >> its correspondent project, however, it quickly became too bloated, and a
> mix
> >> of projects, sub-projects and next-actions. Of course, org helps there
> with
> >> sparse trees and other functions to filter trees, but still, I found it
> was
> >> too complex, albeit more specific and I did felt I was more "organized",
> >> even though I was getting lost.
> >>
> >> So, I just let go of my obsession about the perfect thing and decided to
> try
> >> a single Next Actions list, together with a Projects list. The next
> actions
> >> is a single list with all the actionable items from all the projects.
> I've
> >> lost the relationship between a next action item and a project, but I
> can do
> >> this easily by just looking at the action, having the system tell me is
> not
> >> that important.
> >
> > Usually, you define all actions for a project under the same hierarchy.
>  You
> > can decide how you want actions to be designated "next" (and projects to
> be
> > designated "project") -- using keywords or tags and have a custom agenda
> > command collect the next actions for you from all agenda files in a
> single
> > list.
>
> I define NEXT actions as a tag on some TODO item under the project
> hierarchy.  I then pick NEXT actions off of the custom agenda view for
> NEXT actions using agenda filtering to limit the total number of things
> I'm looking at.
>
> -Bernt
>

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 5463 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
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