From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Neil Smithline Subject: Re: Minimal overhead Org-mode blogging system Date: Tue, 15 May 2012 20:48:48 -0400 Message-ID: <4FB2F970.5050903@neilsmithline.com> References: <2011-12-04T17-22-10@devnull.Karl-Voit.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:44721) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUSQD-0005AU-38 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 15 May 2012 20:48:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUSQ9-0002Wv-VP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 15 May 2012 20:48:56 -0400 Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com ([209.85.216.169]:37848) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SUSQ9-0002WQ-QT for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 15 May 2012 20:48:53 -0400 Received: by qcsd16 with SMTP id d16so136107qcs.0 for ; Tue, 15 May 2012 17:48:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Jude DaShiell Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org I like your indexing idea. I use a less-complex system involving symbolic links for my agenda files. Yours sounds better. This is what I use for my agendas: (setq org-agenda-files (list (expand-file-name "~/Documents/+OrgAgendas"))) (defun org-add-agenda-file () (interactive) (make-symbolic-link (buffer-file-name) "~/Documents/+OrgAgendas")) It is just a quick-and-dirty solution. If I remove or move a file, I get errors. Also, if I stop using a file for agenda items I must manually unlink the symlink. Have you implemented your indexing system Jude or just designed it? I'd love to see it if you have something working. I imagine it could be used for todos, cross-referencing tags, properties, etc... And to prevent Carsten from yelling at me :-D, I would insist that, by default, Emacs would not create the cross-referencing database. You'd have to explicitly enable it. Neil On Mon May 14 22:24:08 2012, Jude DaShiell wrote: > Understand, I use update here in the sense of some file modification > that subsequently gets saved. If files to be modified get archived into > org-mode's revision control system, the blog tag and associated done tag > could be searched for within the save process and an org database could > build with file name and then tripplets of date stamp, line number for > blog tag, line number for done tag and each tripplet would hold another > blog entry in that unique file which is the first field in the data > base. So you want to find a blog entry? Search the org-generated data > base for a date stamp and you come up with the file and the range of > line numbers holding that blog entry. Search one file and go to > specific location in second file. That if it's done or gets done will > keep file searching to a nice minimum permanently. > > On Sun, 13 May 2012, Neil Smithline wrote: > >> >> Karl Voit Karl-Voit.at> writes: >>> Therefore I sat down and thought about a workflow that should be >>> enough for writing simple weblog entries: >>> >>> - create an Org-mode heading (anywhere!) >>> - make sure that there is an (uniq) :ID: property >>> - add the tag :blog: to heading >>> - >>> - change state of top-heading to DONE >>> - this enables blog entries ?in the queue? >>> - (manually) invoke generation-script >>> >>> This enables me quick blogging with a list of advantages: >>> >>> - a blog entry can be located anywhere in all of my Orgmode files >>> - no extra formatting steps >>> - very small (almost non-existent) overhead to create a blog entry >>> - no duplicate information >>> - updates only in Orgmode, not HTML or any in-between format >>> - static (fast) pages >>> - self-hosting without any fancy services behind like RDBS >>> Karl, >> >> I'm wondering if you've played around with this at all? I happen to really like >> the idea but I wonder about its performance. >> >> Unless I'm mistaken, and I very likely may be, won't you have to scan all of >> your .org files to look for the special tags/properties/todo states/whatever? >> >> If not, I'd love to have a pointer to how you can accomplish this without >> scanning every .org file. That would be cool. >> >> >> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > Jude > >