From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Moynihan Subject: Re: Undoing from Org Done Notes Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:10:11 +0100 Message-ID: <48C13DC3.2050908@calicojack.co.uk> References: <48A17627.9060902@calicojack.co.uk> <48C1008C.6000403@calicojack.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kbc13-0003rP-W5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:10:26 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Kbc13-0003rD-AA for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:10:25 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=55216 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Kbc13-0003rA-7G for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:10:25 -0400 Received: from storm.bpweb.net ([83.223.106.8]:38476) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Kbc13-0005w3-1V for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Sep 2008 10:10:25 -0400 In-Reply-To: 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: Carsten Dominik Cc: emacs-orgmode Carsten Dominik wrote: > On Sep 5, 2008, at 11:49 AM, Rick Moynihan wrote: > >> Hi Carsten, >> >> I'll give Bernt's suggestion a try, and hopefully this will happen a >> lot less. I am quite fond of the sequence shifting keys though, so >> we'll see how I get on. >> >> Rather than re-defining undo, which I can see might cause problems. >> Would it be possible to add an extra command into that buffer >> (perhaps on C-c u) that was essentially a keyboard macro for this >> simple sequence? >> >> C-c C-k >> C-_ >> >> I've just tried a defining a macro for this, and it appears to work. >> Would having the following display be a good idea? >> >> # Insert note for closed todo item. >> # Finish with C-c C-c, cancel with C-c C-k, or restore the todo item >> # to it's previous state with C-c u. >> >> Thinking about this now, is there ever a time when you want to C-c C- >> k and not undo the state change?? For me, this would seem to be a >> better behaviour, but then I'm probably missing something. > > Hi Rick, > > this is a good proposal. However, the way the note-recording process > is implemented (using a post-command-hok) makes me worry that after > finishing the note it may not be guarantied to be returned to the > correct buffer, in which case the undo might have undesired results. > Also, the note taking mechanism is not only used after state changes, > but can also be triggered by a clocking event, or by a command from > the agenda. In these cases, the undo would definitely be unwanted, > while you still want to be able to abort the note. Thanks for the explanation. I can see how this would be bad, and would resort to work arounds like having to mark the buffers with the commands that spawned them! It's clearly not as simple a request as I thought. > Also, I believe that C-c C-k is useful as it is, because it aborts > inserting the note but leaves the new state. I use it when I have > switched the state correctly into a state the request a note, but I do > not want to record a note. Yes, I guess it is. Though a check for an empty buffer (bar the comments) could effectively fold this behaviour into C-c C-c. > So I guess you are stuck with writing your own little function... :-) Not a problem; and thanks again for your explanation! :-) R. > - Carsten > >> >> Thanks again for your tireless work, >> >> R. >> >> Carsten Dominik wrote: >>> Hi Rick, >>> since you are normally going to edit the note, certainly with the >>> ability >>> to undo, I don't think it makes sense to redefine undo for this. >>> I can see how what you >>> ask for would be useful, but I see no good logic to implement it. >>> Maybe the easiest is to define yourself a separate key for >>> switching sequences, >>> so that it is less likely to press S-right by accident? >>> - Carsten >>> On Aug 12, 2008, at 1:38 PM, Rick Moynihan wrote: >>>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> I make quite extensive use of org's sequences, and make use of >>>> the org-log-done features to prompt for a note when a task is >>>> closed. >>>> >>>> My problem is that when reorganising I often push a sequence on to >>>> a done state instead of switching sequences, i.e. I press S- >>>> instead of C-S-. When this happens a note window >>>> is popped up, where by I am forced to press C-c C-k to close the >>>> note window, then I need to press C-S-_ to undo the original >>>> change. >>>> >>>> One thing I have noticed is that my reflex action upon seeing the >>>> Note and realising that's not what I want, is to press undo at >>>> that point. Rather than enter the mildly frustrating workflow >>>> above, would it be possible to have undo close the note, and then >>>> revert the headline into it's previous state, by calling undo >>>> again in the original buffer? >>>> >>>> Obviously you'd only want this if the Org Note buffer didn't >>>> contain any changes. If it did, the stock undo behaviour makes >>>> sense, except when you've made some changes and spent all your >>>> undo's, pressing undo again might want to ask whether you want to >>>> close the note and revert the state change in the previous buffer. >>>> >>>> Does this make sense? >>>> >>>> R. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list >>>> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list. >>>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org >>>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode > >