From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Cross Subject: Re: exported contacts problem Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2019 11:28:57 +1000 Message-ID: <878ss9afc6.fsf@gmail.com> References: <20190802160236.GR17561@protected.rcdrun.com> <87mugrb7fi.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <20190802213421.GZ17561@protected.rcdrun.com> <875znfaycd.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <20190803103340.GN23820@protected.rcdrun.com> <874l2yxnrs.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <20190803163219.GZ23820@protected.rcdrun.com> <87pnlmvssp.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58458) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hu5Kc-0008JJ-Oc for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Aug 2019 21:29:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hu5Kb-0000RG-MA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Aug 2019 21:29:06 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x443.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::443]:43057) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hu5Kb-0000Pb-Fm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Aug 2019 21:29:05 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-x443.google.com with SMTP id i189so37855894pfg.10 for ; Sat, 03 Aug 2019 18:29:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from tim-desktop (2001-44b8-31f2-bb00-7285-c2ff-fe35-d2c4.static.ipv6.internode.on.net. [2001:44b8:31f2:bb00:7285:c2ff:fe35:d2c4]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id bo20sm10441870pjb.23.2019.08.03.18.29.00 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 03 Aug 2019 18:29:01 -0700 (PDT) In-reply-to: <87pnlmvssp.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> 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" To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Think I agree. This is close to how I use org as well. For me, org pulls it together - I have data/information in postgres, sqlite, maildirs, filesystem, etc. Notes, todos, journal, bookmarks and documents are in org. I use org as the way to assemble and prsent this information and as an authoring tool, exporting to other formats when necessary. My planning is done in org and I use org as a literate programming envrionment for database work (I work as a DBA), elisp and scripting. For sql it is really great as there are few good systems for working with sql that also support version control. Using org and git, I can get the best of both worlds. When it comes to programming, I tend to use more 'native' environments, especially when a REPL is involved. My contact management requirements are small as it is just for personal stuff. For work, I need to use the enterprise CRM because the information is shared across the organisation and because of the complex legislation regarding personal information management. Eric Abrahamsen writes: > Neil Jerram writes: > >> I've tried to work on contact conversion and synchronization in the past, >> aiming to merge and unify contacts that I've built up in BBDB, Google >> Contacts, email systems, pre-Android phones, etc. The problematic aspect >> was different systems using different field names and structures, e.g. one >> with separate First Name and Last Name, and another with a combined Name >> field; different approaches to breaking up addresses; additional arbitrary >> notes fields; etc. >> >> With that in mind, I'm curious if the writers on this thread could comment >> on: >> 1. is this situation any better now? > > If by "this situation" you mean fragmentation of data formats and > approaches, I don't think it's getting any better! > >> 2. if you favour using org-contacts or org-vcard, what do you see as the >> benefit of Org as your master contact format, as opposed to say BBDB or >> .vcf? > > I think something similar happens with Org as with happens with Emacs in > general: it's such a nice environment to be working in that people want > to move all their stuff into it. But there are some areas (contact > management, email, large datasets) where Org just isn't going to work as > well as a specialized tool. > > But Org can be an excellent *interface* to those tools, mostly through > dynamic blocks. I've started using small sqlite databases to keep track > of things, and dynamic blocks as sql composers/views, and it works > great. It's very easy to play with the queries, and this is the first > time I'm actually starting to feel comfortable with sql. > > I think in general Org is best used as a compositional tool for data > drawn from elsewhere. > > Eric -- Tim Cross