From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bernt Hansen Subject: Re: Timeline not working in 5.20 Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:48:29 -0500 Message-ID: <87wspgom9u.fsf@gollum.intra.norang.ca> References: <87ir12e76r.fsf@kamaloka.dhatu> <81156AB7-161F-4CBB-A936-54DA8F56D9A2@science.uva.nl> <47AA0308.1030109@gmail.com> <87abmdwuj9.fsf@shellarchive.co.uk> <3D8D588E-0E2D-4C86-B910-8A8CF0135E1D@science.uva.nl> 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 1JN83J-0002dr-2A for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:48:37 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JN83I-0002dY-Df for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:48:36 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JN83I-0002dU-69 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:48:36 -0500 Received: from mho-02-bos.mailhop.org ([63.208.196.179]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JN83H-0002xP-S0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Feb 2008 09:48:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: <3D8D588E-0E2D-4C86-B910-8A8CF0135E1D@science.uva.nl> (Carsten Dominik's message of "Thu\, 7 Feb 2008 08\:12\:53 +0100") 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@gnu.org, Mark Ochocki Carsten Dominik writes: > On Feb 7, 2008, at 3:11 AM, Mark Ochocki wrote: > >> Phil Jackson wrote: >>> Wanrong Lin writes: >>>> I have the same problem, and here is a mini-example that will >>>> generate >>>> the error "Arithmetic range error: "floor", -0.0e+NaN ", hope it >>>> helps. >>> I've had a look and I think the culprit is: >>> ,----[ line 21411 ] >>> | dfrac (/ (* 1.0 (- wdays diff)) wdays) >>> `---- >>> Which evals to -0.0e+NaN and then propagates. Might see if I can dig >>> further tomorrow if I get time. >>> Cheers, >>> Phil >> >> I believe line 21411 also causes problems with Deadlines when >> individual items are changed from the default set in org-deadline- >> warning-days. >> >> Here's an example from my org file: >> >> Day-agenda: >> Controller: In 4 d.: TODO Review Fin... :workpc:(priority 1060) >> Controller: In 5 d.: TODO Brief MA... :work: (priority 1050) >> Controller: In 4 d.: TODO Run sale... :workpc:(priority 1042) >> >> org file: >> ***** TODO Run sale... :workpc: >> DEADLINE: <2008-02-10 Sun +1m -7d> >> ***** TODO Review Fin... :workpc: >> DEADLINE: <2008-02-10 Sun +1m -10d> >> ***** TODO Brief MA... :work: >> DEADLINE: <2008-02-11 Mon -10d> > > Well, I guess this is a matter of taste. Do you want the deadlines > prioritized > according to the fraction of warning time that has past, or according to > the number of days left to do them. Opinions? > > - Carsten Here's my two cents :) I think prioritizing it based on the number of days left to complete it and still meet the deadline makes more sense to me. I set longer time frames for some deadlines because I want them to be visible early on the agenda as a reminder even if I'm not planning to work on them right away. Deadlines are drop dead dates for me and things need to be completed on or before the deadline expires. Working on the things that expire first just feels more natural to me. -Bernt > >> >> >> >> I think the 5 day deadline should have a lower priority than the 4 >> day priority regardless of the percentage of completion. Agree? >> >> Mark J. Ochocki