Re: Changes to contrib

[Kosyrev Serge <_deepfire@feelingofgreen.ru>]

Rasmus <rasmus@gmx.us> writes:
> Serge Kosyrev <_deepfire@feelingofgreen.ru> writes:
>> I'm not sure how wise it would be to raise barriers for contribution,
>> given the current state of the thing..
>
> I don't know what state you refer to.

Well, I couldn't use it, without significant tweaking.

It feels as if the thing doesn't have a maintainer and slowly decomposes.

>>> Some quick comments from skimming your code (note, I have no idea what a
>>> taskjuggler is):
>>>
>>> I don’t know what you refer to explicitly.  But that should be fixed, I
>>> guess.
>>
>> I'm sorry, what should be?
>
> Sorry, I was referring to this quote by you, which seems to have
> disappeared:
>
>>>> (One immediate nitpick, of course, is that none of the additions
>>>>  are documented..)

That is true, yes.

The question is.. the only documentation for ox-taskjuggler that exists
in Worg, seems to only cover the surface aspects of export -- none of
the existing documentation touches on the multitude of details that the
existing code does involve itself with.

The point I'm trying to make, is that producing some documentation that
would cover the details (that one actually expects to be covered, coming
from the TaskJuggler background) seems like a separate task.

That is, not in scope of my little "tweak it to work for myself" series..

>>> I think you add some more taskjuggle keywords/properties for
>>> example.

I do, indeed -- and they are undocumented in a matter that is similar to
the 80% of pre-existing properties.

>> [...]
>>> Also, you introduce a dependency on subr-x, which may or may not be an
>>> issue since it’s in contrib.
>>
>> I'm sorry, I'm not sure what do you mean?  I looked at subr-x.el, and
>> I didn't find any reference to any of those functions..
>
> You use string-join, which is in subr-x.  I think subr-x was not a
> dependency before.

Oh, indeed -- missed that!

What should I do about it?

>>> org-export-map-special-nodes and org-element-multivalued-property are not
>>> proper names, as they will supposedly only be used in ox-taskjuggler.
>>
>> Well, the functions themselves are supposed to be generic.
>>
>> There are two ways to name a function, in my mind:
>>
>>   - by intended application
>>   - by what it does
>>
>> ..it's just that I chose the second.. in the futile hope that someone,
>> sometime will move/use them. : -)
>
> Then they are in the wrong library.
>
>> If you deem it not to be an appropriate course of thought, I will
>> change the name, sure.
>
> At this point, they lack appropriate names.

Understood, will rename, then.

-- 
с уважениeм / respectfully,
Косырев Сергей