From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Adam Spiers Subject: Re: archival mirroring source headline structure? Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:00:05 +0100 Message-ID: <20080610100005.GE5498@atlantic.linksys.moosehall> References: <20080609115203.GA19192@atlantic.linksys.moosehall> <9592BB6CDB1CEB48826BE86ACD71FA996ABF72@kwik.ic.uva.nl> Reply-To: Adam Spiers 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 1K60eA-0004Xu-Gb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:00:10 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1K60e9-0004XA-D7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:00:09 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=36934 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1K60e8-0004We-J7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:00:08 -0400 Received: from mail.beimborn.com ([70.84.38.100]:47233) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1K60e8-0000Wg-Ez for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:00:08 -0400 Received: from mail.beimborn.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.beimborn.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id m5AA06FX009556 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:00:06 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by mail.beimborn.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11/Submit) id m5AA06lx009550 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Jun 2008 11:00:06 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9592BB6CDB1CEB48826BE86ACD71FA996ABF72@kwik.ic.uva.nl> 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: org-mode mailing list On Tue, Jun 10, 2008 at 05:28:04AM +0200, Dominik, C. wrote: > Hi Adam, I mean more complex possibilities, like > > * A > ** B > *** C > *** D > > Archive C, do more work, then archive A. The possibilities are endless, it seems to me. With auto-vivification I don't see a problem here. Archiving C would automatically create ancestors A and B if they didn't already exist. Then archiving A later would simply merge the two trees together in the archive and remove it from the source file.