From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robert Horn Subject: Re: [GSoC] org-merge-driver weekly update Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:20:39 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87C9FA23-FD18-4BEF-9644-5BEBA3650F41@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:56820) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ScH6S-0006RX-PF for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:20:58 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ScH6I-0002x0-Sf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:20:52 -0400 Received: from mailbackend.panix.com ([166.84.1.89]:50164) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ScH6I-0002wm-Kg for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jun 2012 10:20:42 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87C9FA23-FD18-4BEF-9644-5BEBA3650F41@gmail.com> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Carsten Dominik , Andrew Young Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Carsten Dominik writes: > On 6.6.2012, at 15:50, Andrew Young wrote: > As a general remark, if you implement things like aggressive resorting, > I think it would be good to have such features optional, in some > way configurable. Turning off all bells would then do a simple stable > outline tree inserting like you have in your prototype. Increasing > complexity can and should be implemented, but I would like them optional > for users (opt-out is OK). > I agree. I'm thinking about a problem that I routinely have. I work on multiple computers capturing notes into journals that are date-trees. I resynchronize these journals using git, and git is often confused about what to do when it sees the same base tree with different additions from the different computers. In my usage there are never deletes, and I would expect that the order of headlines in the original versions would be preserved as the order of those headlines in the merged version. I don't get out of order headlines because the capture function manages the date tree for me. If I had an improperly ordered input I would prefer to have the merger fail and ask for manual help. If it's out of order that means either something went wrong with the capture function, or I manually did something that I might want preserved. For instance, I might archive the 2010 notes into some other file, and replace them with a link to that file. I would want to preserve this. (Actually the issue of how to manage such archival is one that I haven't given much thought, since disk space is cheap and it's easy to collapse the old stuff.) Robert Horn