Re: tags-todo agenda shoud not ignore DONE items

[Kyle Meyer <kyle@kyleam.com>]

[ Sorry for the slow reply here, and thank you for looking into this. ]

James N V Cash writes:

> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Confirming this as an issue, if someone wants to fix it.
>
> I've tried taking a shot at addressing this issue via the patch attached.
>
> As mentioned in the thread, might potentially cause issues by changing
> how it matches -- should there be an option? Or is the idea just that
> if you really do want to exclude done tags, you'd query like "/!DONE"?

Yep, that's the idea, I think.  It's mentioned in both 942b6267a
(org-agenda: `tags-todo' command type includes DONE keywords,
2017-04-18) and 2fb129b5c (`org-scan-tags' retrieve all TODO keywords,
not only not-done ones, 2017-08-17).

>
> diff --git a/lisp/org.el b/lisp/org.el
> index 020cfc873..3db1add8b 100644
> --- a/lisp/org.el
> +++ b/lisp/org.el
> @@ -11691,7 +11691,7 @@ See also `org-scan-tags'."
>  		       `(and ,tagsmatcher ,todomatcher)
>  		     (or tagsmatcher todomatcher t))))
>        (when org--matcher-tags-todo-only
> -	(setq matcher `(and (member todo org-not-done-keywords) ,matcher)))
> +	(setq matcher `(and (member todo org-todo-keywords-1) ,matcher)))
>        (cons match0 `(lambda (todo tags-list level) ,matcher)))))
>  
>  (defun org--tags-expand-group (group tag-groups expanded)

This does resolve the reported issue with the b tags-todo set reported
in <https://orgmode.org/list/m2ftazm3l1.fsf@brautaset.org>.  However, it
breaks the org-tags-view todo-only operation (agenda's M): it no longer
filters out todos in a DONE state.  This behavior is explicitly
specified in the manual:

  Using ‘M-x org-agenda M’ or ‘/!’ does not match TODO keywords in a
  DONE state.

In <https://orgmode.org/list/87d061auiw.fsf@kyleam.com>, I asked,
"shouldn't tags-todo consider only none-DONE todo items, in the same
spirit as m versus M?"  And, looking at this again, it's not only in
spirit; the tags-todo agenda view and org-tags-view's todo-only are
really directly linked:

   ((eq type 'tags-todo)
    (org-let lprops '(org-tags-view '(4) org-match)))

After rereading the thread at m2ftazm3l1.fsf@brautaset.org, I'm still
not convinced we should break that link.