Re: org-mode + icicles, avoid key binding redefinitions?

[Iannis Zannos <zannos@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2019 bytes --]

Agree.
To do my own rebindings i use this kind of code:

(eval-after-load 'org
  '(define-key org-mode-map (kbd "C-c C-=") 'org-icicle-imenu))

But when re-opening a buffer with desktop after rebooting emacs, the
new bindings are not added

IZ



On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Andreas Leha <
andreas.leha@med.uni-goettingen.de> wrote:

> Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > Hi Nick,
> >
> > Nick Dokos <ndokos@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> I find myself more in agreement with Seb than with Bastien here. The
> >> argument that reducing the number of "bad" bindings reduces the chance
> >> of conflicts does not hold water IMO: we will always have to be looking
> >> in the rear-view mirror for some minor mode that will step on us.
> >
> > In the last ten years, we had only *one* such problem while having a
> > dozen of faulty keybindings --- my hope is that, with only a fistful
> > of faulty keybindings, we won't have to look in the rear-view mirror
> > for the next twenty years :)  [IOW: I don't buy the all-or-nothing
> > reasoning.]
> >
>
> I might be missing something here.  But I think it would not be a
> problem for Bastien (and others with similar preferences) to rebind the
> keys to the shorter and potentially problematic version.  So to me it
> seems, that the only problem with making the default keybindings less
> 'offensive' is finding non-taken and non-offensive keybindings.
>
> The question is whether Org could do something to make rebinding keys
> easier?  Like a worg page / FAQ about 'getting the old keybindings
> back', maybe?
>
> Just my 2ct, of course.
> - Andreas
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > More precisely, I suggest these rebindings:
> >
> > C-c # Checkboxes     => C-c C-#
> > C-c , Priorities     => C-c C-,
> > C-c ; Comment lines  => C-c C-;
> > C-c @ Mark subtree   => C-c C-@
> >
> > (Note they are also accessible through speedy keys.)
> >
> > C-c ~ Cooperation    => C-c C-~
> >
> > (This one I just discovered.)
> >
> > Let's not get trapped in a "buridanesque" decision.  :)
>
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3448 bytes --]