From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Bug: agenda interaction with org-agenda-dim-blocked-tasks, org-agenda-max-entries and org-enforce-todo-dependencies [8.3beta (release_8.3beta-785-gb5d9f4 @ /Users/yn/dotfiles/org.emacs.d/org-mode/lisp/)] Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2015 23:52:48 +0100 Message-ID: <87zj8u1ubj.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <87d25q3dh5.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <874mr23aro.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33126) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YImJx-00035Q-1g for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 17:51:50 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YImJs-0007lk-2n for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 17:51:48 -0500 Received: from relay6-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::198]:42549) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YImJr-0007lf-KA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Feb 2015 17:51:43 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Yuri Niyazov's message of "Tue, 3 Feb 2015 14:39:09 -0800") 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-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Yuri Niyazov Cc: "emacs-orgmode@gnu.org" Yuri Niyazov writes: > I now think that having the ability to dim to invisible is a feature > mistake. I'm having a difficult time seeing when a user would want to > dim to invisible purely visually, rather than really skipping a > blocked task. There's no visual difference between dimming to > invisible and skipping, but they have subtly different and > non-intuitive differences in behavior. A better fix would be to create > a org-agenda-skip-blocked-tasks setting (which would be implemented > much like other skip settings) and in the docstring in dim to > invisible setting explain the difference and point to the new setting, > and maybe eventually deprecate dim to invisible. > > If you think that is an acceptable direction, I am happy to start > working on a patch. Sounds good. Please go ahead. Regards,