[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Orgmode] bug in "simple dependencies" handling (?)

From: Carsten Dominik
Subject: Re: [Orgmode] bug in "simple dependencies" handling (?)
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:39:14 +0200

Hi Daniel,

looks that your modification do the right thing - almost.
It does not check if the parent itself is a TODO, and I
think this would be necessary as well.  Because it would
allow to have do-able subtasks in the list without
too much blocking.

So "write hopping list" would not be blocked in this case:

* organize party
** TODO send invitations
*** TODO send invitation to Paul
*** TODO send invitation to Nicole
*** ect.
** Buy meals and drinks
*** TODO write shopping list
*** TODO get money  from my bank account
*** TODO buy food
*** TODO buy drinks

Would you agree?

- Carsten

On Mar 28, 2009, at 3:52 AM, Daniel wrote:

Oh my god! I think I've found a good solution :)

Can you please tell me, whether it's crap or not?

Only 4 lines differ from the original
org-block-todo-from-children-or-siblings hook. I've marked
the lines with "comment lines", they are before and after
the ORDERED-property check, at the end of the function.

(defun org-block-todo-from-children-or-siblings-or-parent (change- plist)
"Block turning an entry into a TODO, using the hierarchy.
This checks whether the current task should be blocked from state
changes.  Such blocking occurs when:

1. The task has children which are not all in a completed state.

2. A task has a parent with the property :ORDERED:, and there
   are siblings prior to the current task with incomplete
(catch 'dont-block
;; If this is not a todo state change, or if this entry is already DONE,
  ;; do not block
(when (or (not (eq (plist-get change-plist :type) 'todo-state- change))
        (member (plist-get change-plist :from)
            (cons 'done org-done-keywords))
        (member (plist-get change-plist :to)
            (cons 'todo org-not-done-keywords)))
    (throw 'dont-block t))
  ;; If this task has children, and any are undone, it's blocked
    (org-back-to-heading t)
    (let ((this-level (funcall outline-level)))
  (let ((child-level (funcall outline-level)))
    (while (and (not (eobp))
            (> child-level this-level))
      ;; this todo has children, check whether they are all
      ;; completed
      (if (and (not (org-entry-is-done-p))
      (throw 'dont-block nil))
      (setq child-level (funcall outline-level))))))
  ;; Otherwise, if the task's parent has the :ORDERED: property, and
  ;; any previous siblings are undone, it's blocked
(save-excursion (save-match-data
  (ignore-errors (while t
    (org-back-to-heading t)
    (when (save-excursion
      (org-up-heading-all 1)
      (org-entry-get (point) "ORDERED")))
  (let* ((this-level (funcall outline-level))
         (current-level this-level))
    (while (and (not (bobp))
            (>= current-level this-level))
      (setq current-level (funcall outline-level))
      (if (= current-level this-level)
      ;; This is a younger sibling, check if it is completed
      (if (and (not (org-entry-is-done-p))
          (throw 'dont-block nil)))))))
  (org-back-to-heading t)
  (org-up-heading-all 1)))))

(add-hook 'org-blocker-hook 'org-block-todo-from-children-or- siblings-or-parent)

Carsten Dominik wrote:
Hi Daniel,

one problem might have been a bug I just fixed.

Another problem is that the way you wrote your code, a child
on an ordered sequence will block the parent, and the parent
will block the child.

I'd like to come around an fix this, just not clear yet how, and
how to do it efficiently.

- Carsten

On Mar 27, 2009, at 1:24 AM, Daniel wrote:

Hello Carsten,

thanks for your reply.

Hi Daniel,

yes, this could be seen as a bug.  However, the implementation
does not work by scanning the entire buffer and marking tasks
that should be blocked.  Rather, it goes to each task and then
scans around to see locally what the dependencies are.

In this case it looks only at the parent, not at the
grand parent.
Wouldn't it be enough to check whether the parent is blocked.
Wouldn't that generate a blocking-chain?

However, the todo
dependencies are simple hook functions, and an interested
programmer could relatively easily extend them, I believe.
I've tried to write a custom org-blocker-hook but it doesn't work,

Can you (or someone else) tell me please what's wrong with my code?

(defun org-block-todo-with-blocked-parent (change-plist)
;; check whether we are in a endless loop:
(if (plist-get change-plist :org-block-todo-with-blocked-parent)
 ;; We are in a endless loop: don't block (return t)
 ;; We are not in a endless loop: go to the parent heading
   (org-back-to-heading t)
   (ignore-errors (org-up-heading-all 1))
;; generate a fake change-plist with a flag to indicate a endless loop
   (setq fake-change-plist
       :type 'todo-state-change
       :from "DONE"
       :to "TODO"
       :position 0
       :org-block-todo-with-blocked-parent t))
;; check whether the parent heading should be blocked and return the result
(run-hook-with-args-until-failure 'org-blocker-hook fake- change-plist)))))

(add-hook 'org-blocker-hook 'org-block-todo-with-blocked-parent)

I don't expect to change this because it would make the
mechanism a lot more complex and slower.
I think it's essential to provide this eventuality. For example
this tree:

* organize party
** TODO send invitations
*** TODO send invitation to Paul
*** TODO send invitation to Nicole
*** ect.
** TODO buy meals and drinks
*** TODO write shopping list
*** TODO get money  from my bank account
*** TODO buy food
*** TODO buy drinks

with this tree, only "send invitation to Paul" and "send invitation to Nicole" should be on my agenda. But "write shopping list" is also an my agenda list (although it shouldn't: I can't write a shopping list if I don't know how
many people will come to my party).

best regards,

- Carsten

On Mar 24, 2009, at 8:13 PM, Daniel Hochheimer wrote:


first of all, please excuse my poorly english.

It seems there is a bug in the handling of simple dependencies.
I think an example tree is the best solution, to show you the bug:

* Projects
#+CATEGORY: Projects
*** TODO foo bar project
***** TODO foo subproject        :FooSubproject:
******* TODO Task 1
***** TODO bar subproject        :BarSubproject:
******* TODO Task 1

This is in my .emacs file:
(setq org-enforce-todo-dependencies t)
(setq org-agenda-dim-blocked-tasks 'invisible)
(setq org-odd-levels-only t)

the expected global todo agenda view imho is:

Projects:    Task 1       :FooSubproject:

but actual it is unfortunately:

Projects:    Task 1       :FooSubproject:
Projects:    Task 1       :BarSubproject:

Imho "Task 1" from "bar subproject" should not be visible,
because "bar subproject " is blocked because of the
ORDERED property (therefore it's childs should be blocked, too)

Is it easy / possible to fix this bug? My whole GTD system is
heavily based on such project / subproject-Constructs. But with
this bug my global todo agenda view is unfortunately "polluted"
a little bit with tasks from projects that shouldn't be active.

Best regards,

PS: many thanks to the developer of this great emacs mode, I really
enjoy org-mode. I started using emacs only because of the great
abilities of org-mode.

Emacs-orgmode mailing list
Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]