From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Uwe Brauer Subject: Re: org-annotate/collaboration? Date: Sat, 11 Feb 2017 18:07:33 +0000 Message-ID: <87mvds1tzu.fsf@mat.ucm.es> References: <87wpd02b3s.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60026) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ccc5M-0001Sv-I4 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 13:07:50 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ccc5J-00049R-EN for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 13:07:48 -0500 Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=56175 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ccc5J-00048o-6q for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 13:07:45 -0500 Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ccc5A-0002Kg-Fh for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Feb 2017 19:07:36 +0100 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 >>> "Eric" == Eric Abrahamsen writes: > Matt Price writes: >> Does anyone use org-annotate actively? I'm wondering what your >> workflow is, how you incorporate comments, etc. > I wrote it, and I don't use it that much. I do use it for quick > notes-to-self when writing, but footnotes do the job just as well. >> I'm hoping to embark on a book project with a colleague. I would like >> to use org-mode if I can, but I need to get a sense of the >> collaboration workflow. When you work on projects together, do you use >> annotations? Or git pull requests? If the latter, od you use any >> filters, or any magit tricks, to approve or modify suggested changes >> chunk by chunk? > It's a huge problem, and one that org-annotate isn't going to solve. I > do a lot of manuscript editing, and passing files around, and have only > barely gotten some people to accept my "weird" workflow, which is to > send them a clean version of an edited file, and along with that an HTML > file containing htmlized word-diff output, where the insertions and > deletions are colorized. They make further edits on the clean copy, and > I do another go-around. It's a huge pain. I did (and still do) the same, using latex and latexdiff, but found out that a better solution is to use mercurial and bitbucket (I presume git should be fine as well), since one of my collaborators agree to use it as well. This is quite a relief to the former method relying on external tools and email. - Usually instead of comments I use issuesin bitbucket. - hg diff is not perfect but a good first approximation.