From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: Release: Org-mode 5.09 Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2007 15:34:33 +0200 Message-ID: <871wctcvfa.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> References: <200709181700.17786.zslevin@gmail.com> <572452f66890dd8ebca04908cbd33e29@gmail.com> <87y7f3v5qh.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <69ce18fe638d5ec66232d221c36c7814@science.uva.nl> 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 1IYMB3-0001Iu-5Y for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:34:45 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IYMB0-0001Ia-TL for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:34:44 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IYMB0-0001IX-Nv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:34:42 -0400 Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.185]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1IYMB0-0003X6-Bi for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 09:34:42 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id f5so468156nfh for ; Thu, 20 Sep 2007 06:34:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <69ce18fe638d5ec66232d221c36c7814@science.uva.nl> (Carsten Dominik's message of "Thu, 20 Sep 2007 10:45:49 +0200") 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 Carsten Dominik writes: > How about this: > > S-up : nil -> [#A] -> nil -> [#C] -> [#B] -> [#A] -> nil -> [#C] ... > S-sown : nil -> [#C] -> nil -> [#A] -> [#B] -> [#C] -> nil -> [#A] ... Yes, the general scheme looks fine to me. The only thing that still tickles me here is that the *default* priority is not the *easiest* to assign. So why not this: S-up : nil -> [#B] -> [#A] -> nil -> [#C] -> [#B] -> [#A] -> nil... S-sown : nil -> [#B] -> [#C] -> nil -> [#A] -> [#B] -> [#C] -> nil... As obvious, the problem in this case is that different keys first assign the same (default) priority. Anyway, I won't linger on this further since anyone seems to be okay with the proposed solution! -- Bastien