From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Possible bug in ordered tasks
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 09:03:04 +0200
Message-ID: <4264D53A-92CE-43C1-A7CC-5526DDD90BC4@gmail.com>
References: <4C1B93D4.1050000@sift.info>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54222 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OSD7v-0004TF-DK
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 13:55:49 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>) id 1OS2wR-0007eO-4w
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:03:13 -0400
Received: from mail-ww0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:55459)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>) id 1OS2wQ-0007eJ-Vr
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:03:11 -0400
Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so810519wwf.0
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 00:03:10 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4C1B93D4.1050000@sift.info>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: rpgoldman@sift.info
Cc: Org Mode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Hi Robert,

On Jun 18, 2010, at 5:42 PM, Robert Goldman wrote:

> I have found what I believe to be a bug in handling ordered subtasks.
> Here is the behavior:
>
> I have a top level set of tasks that is ordered.
>
> One of the outline items below the top level set is a grab bag of  
> tasks
> that will be performed in parallel.  So this task is NOT ordered
> (ORDERED: nil).
>
> The problem is that the blocking behavior from ordered tasks seems  
> to be
> inherited from the top level task list into the second level of the
> outline, even though the ORDERED property at the second level is
> explicitly overridden.
>
> I am attaching an org file that displays this issue.  To see the
> problem, put your cursor on the "Bar" task and attempt to change its
> status to DONE.

The problem here is that the value of the ORDERED property is the  
string "nil", and that is of course not nil!

I have introduced a special case to have "nil" interpreted as nil  
here, because your use case makes a lot of sense.

Thanks!

- Carsten