Re: org-todo-keywords and task sequence

[David Masterson <dsmasterson@gmail.com>]

Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> writes:

> David Masterson <dsmasterson@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> The problem is (I think), when you attach @ or ! to the state and, as you
>> cycle thru (S-right), new unintended notes will be added as you cycle to
>> the state you're looking for.  True?
>
> If you attach @ or !, those notes are not unintended.
> S-right is not for you to play around, it is for actual work on actual
> tasks. If you tell Org to take a not on switching to next TODO state,
> that's what you want. If you don't want it, don't put @ or !.

I think I understand what you're saying, but the last statement seems
wrong and should be "don't use cycling or sequences".  Notes are much
more important feature.

What I've been saying is that, except for simple sequences, cycling will
get you into trouble with notes as a lazy person (aren't we all?) may
cycle thru something unintended.

>> Can you repeat a keyword in org-todo-keywords? Perhaps there should be a
>> sparse table defining, for a current state, what are the potential next
>> states? ...
>
> No. S-right feature is there for simple workflows.
> I am against introducing complex workflows for no reason.
> It will do no good for the users. Complex workflows are rarely useful in
> practice, except some specialized scenarios, which are not common enough
> to include into the core.

The problem is that todo keywords are being treated both as "state"
(sequence) and "type" (type) which mixes things up.  I guess I'm used to
thinking of workflows as a digraph -- particularly in big projects where
you want to be able to justify your work to the boss.  But, I guess
that's clock in/out.

> And yes, you can use org-edna or custom org-trigger-hook if you need
> something non-orthodox.

I'll have to look at org-edna more.

Thanks

-- 
David Masterson