From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: Re: skip entry with inherited tags Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 16:32:12 +0200 Message-ID: <6694F386-1367-43D6-9587-7F26ECBC9C57@gmail.com> References: <20100518074232.GA10524@mteege.de> <4BF2778D.9070702@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> <87mxvxdsv7.fsf@fastmail.fm> <4C082225.6020007@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> <4C08ED73.1000104@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> <4C343FB2.3080204@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> <4C3CA546.3060000@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> <3BFF4D35-CD16-4A41-B0A4-383538586592@gmail.com> <4C3CCDE4.9000600@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> 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: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39193 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ObaLK-00039U-5S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:32:19 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ObaLI-0000t5-Tr for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:32:18 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f41.google.com ([209.85.215.41]:65144) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ObaLI-0000sy-KC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:32:16 -0400 Received: by ewy28 with SMTP id 28so2553038ewy.0 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 07:32:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4C3CCDE4.9000600@os.inf.tu-dresden.de> 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: Martin Pohlack Cc: Matt Lundin , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Martin, I just looked at your patch. If I have a normal agenda (i.e. *not* a block agenda), then your patch will cause the preset filter *not* to be applied. - Carsten On Jul 13, 2010, at 10:34 PM, Martin Pohlack wrote: > Hi Carsten and Matt, > > On 13.07.2010 20:48, Carsten Dominik wrote: >> On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:41 PM, Martin Pohlack wrote: >>> Hard to respond to this vague situation :-). >>> >>> It would be great if you could point me at more specific situations >>> that >>> might break or if others could test the patch. I have been using it >>> for >>> more than a month now without problems. >> >> The specific one I meant is if you use r or g to rebuild the agenda, >> if you do something like a refile command which does an automatic >> rebuild, >> do you get back the view you expected? > > Yes, I regularly use 'r'. It works for me. Refiling a single entry > did > not show a problem. > >> Also, if you apply other filter commands, either with "/", or >> narrowing >> the filter with "/", does that give the expected results while you >> are >> in your block agenda? > > I quickly applied a tag filter using '/' 'tab'. Only the relevant > entries were shown. Some block agendas become empty as expected. > Clearing the filter restores the expected full view. > > I am not entirely sure that the patch does not have problems though. > > Matt: could you give the patch a quick test at your end? > >>>> I will only be able to study this more closely after the release. >>> >>> Take your time, I will wait for more details to emerge or feedback >>> from >>> other testers. >>> >>> One more note here: The current situation for block agendas is a bit >>> problematic as their limitations are not documented afaik. >>> >>> Writing custom agendas is not easy in itself. If things don't work, >>> it >>> is really hard to distinguish between driver errors and >>> limitations of >>> the block agendas. >> >> Do you have suggestions on how to improve the situation? > > * Well, the best thing to do would be to remove the limitations of the > block agendas, obviously :-), which I hope this patch does. > > * The second best thing is to document them. > > I am aware of this tag filter limitation, but no others from the top > of > my head. Do others know more? > > Cheers, > Martin - Carsten