From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Friedrich Delgado Friedrichs Subject: Re: Re: Proposed key binding changes: archiving and attachments Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 11:46:34 +0100 Message-ID: <20091109104634.GA12179@taupan.ath.cx> References: <20091106134034.GA7997@taupan.ath.cx> <6ac505ad0911061711j9fcc5en4dc4b2e013c5f68e@mail.gmail.com> <87r5s8vpr9.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: friedel@nomaden.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N7Rlm-0002Jc-5A for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:46:46 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1N7Rlh-0002HS-El for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:46:45 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=56574 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1N7Rlh-0002HO-A9 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:46:41 -0500 Received: from dudelab.org ([212.12.33.202]:17035 helo=mail.dudelab.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N7Rlg-00081i-Ut for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 05:46:41 -0500 Received: from abrasax.taupan.ath.cx (p5DE8B93B.dip.t-dialin.net [93.232.185.59]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "Friedrich Delgado Friedrichs", Issuer "User CA" (verified OK)) by mail.dudelab.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C69A228148 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 11:47:01 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87r5s8vpr9.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hm... Paul Mead schrieb: > Carsten Dominik writes: > > I actually think that few people use archiving to sibling. Am I wrong about > > this? I've never used archiving to sibling on purpose. After using it accidentaly once, I was a bit annoyed at having to clean up the structure of my project. > I use archiving to sibling for sub-headings in projects that are still > current, to tidy things up, then archive the whole project subtree to > the archive file when it's finished. I'd prefer to have archive to > sibling as the default option with the fewest keystrokes. ---Zitatende--- Hm, I use the archive tag for exactly that purpose. I prefer to see the original structure in the tree, but with the dead branches (i.e. already resolved subprojects). But don't get me wrong, I don't want to proselytise or something. It's a good thing, that org offers so many ways of organising our "stuff". ;) -- Friedrich Delgado Friedrichs TauPan on Ircnet and Freenode ;)