From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Subject: Global agenda views creates lots of buffers. Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:17:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87iqb43eco.fsf@telefonica.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NVRSs-0004LF-LE for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:18:26 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NVRSo-0004Gl-AK for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:18:25 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=39853 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NVRSm-0004Gg-PU for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:18:20 -0500 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:36956) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NVRSm-0004Hq-BQ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 10:18:20 -0500 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1NVRSa-0006Jd-5h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:18:08 +0100 Received: from 251.red-88-24-228.staticip.rima-tde.net ([88.24.228.251]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:18:08 +0100 Received: from ofv by 251.red-88-24-228.staticip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 16:18:08 +0100 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 I have quite a few org files in org-agenda-files. When a global agenda view is displayed (the Global TODO, for instance) org-mode visits all the files and keeps the buffer for each of them. I'll prefer this behavior: for each file in org-agenda-files have we a buffer containing it? no -> create a buffer and visit it do our stuff (gather TODO items, etc) if we were not visiting the file kill the buffer that contains it. Is there a reason for keeping all those buffers around? -- Óscar