From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp2 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id qHl4FYZktl9oRwAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:26:46 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp2 with LMTPS id SEtHEYZktl/LFwAAB5/wlQ (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:26:46 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B69AC940466 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 12:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:35772 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kfj1Q-0004xv-Ke for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:26:44 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:48200) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kfj11-0004xi-Q5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:26:19 -0500 Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([195.110.48.8]:49692) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kfj0u-0005RL-Ts for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:26:18 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D84FE6256 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:26:03 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.mojserwer.eu Received: from mail.mojserwer.eu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.mojserwer.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xaiqxfmeu3fw for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:25:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (79.163.143.224.ipv4.supernova.orange.pl [79.163.143.224]) by mail.mojserwer.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6EB33E6255 for ; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:25:59 +0100 (CET) User-agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 27.0.50 From: Marcin Borkowski To: Org-Mode mailing list Subject: Clock tables and two ways to categorize tasks Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:25:55 +0100 Message-ID: <87tutljzxo.fsf@mbork.pl> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=195.110.48.8; envelope-from=mbork@mbork.pl; helo=mail.mojserwer.eu X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/11/19 07:26:03 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.11 and newer [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -25 X-Spam_score: -2.6 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Scanner: ns3122888.ip-94-23-21.eu Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Spam-Score: -1.01 X-TUID: Y5EKRjTTv7wr Hi all, here's the problem I'd like to solve. I clock various tasks, and then generate a clock table. So far, so good. But now I'd like to know better where my time goes. Most tasks I do have a few similar components: discussion/research, writing code, testing, etc. I thought that I could create subheadlines under each of the tasks and give them tags like :discuss:, :code:, :test:, :debug: and so on. (Not very convenient, but doable, maybe with a bit of Elisp to automate the process.) Now, I'd like to prepare two clock tables: one where I see how much time every task took, and one where I can see how much time I spent coding, testing, debugging, emailing etc. I can see in the docs that there is the ~:match~ option, but if I understand it correctly, it can only restrict the table to /one/ tag, so I'd need to have as many tables as I have tags - not optimal. Any ideas? Should I use something else than tags for that? TIA, -- Marcin Borkowski http://mbork.pl