[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Orgmode] [Patch] Sort agenda items by todo-state
From: |
Carsten Dominik |
Subject: |
Re: [Orgmode] [Patch] Sort agenda items by todo-state |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Nov 2007 08:35:03 +0100 |
I for one do like the patch, so please clean it up and I would be
happy to take it
(if you have signed the papers with the FSF, that is :-(
- Carsten
On Nov 21, 2007 1:13 PM, Egli Christian (KIRO 41)
<address@hidden> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> * Introduction
> I live in my org agenda view and I schedule all my tasks to the
> day that I want to do them. I also would like to see my
> achievements so I keep the TODOs that are done in the agenda
> view. However I would like them to get out of the way so that I
> can better see the tasks that are still open. That is why for a
> long time I've been wanting to sort the agenda items by todo
> state.
>
> * Patch
> I finally looked at the code and realized that this was not very
> hard to do. The following patch (against 5.13i) implements a new
> org-agenda-sorting-strategy that allows you to sort agenda items
> by todo-state.
>
> * Notes
> The patch is basically a "works-for-me" implementation. It only
> sorts todo and scheduled items. It should probably do the same
> for deadlines. Maybe even for timestamps?
>
> The doc strings need to be updated.
>
> Carsten at one time talked about implementing this feature by
> using priorities, i.e. factoring the todo-state into the priority
> (which uses the actual priority plus some calculation based on
> how many days the task is overdue). This patch takes a different
> route.
>
> The sorting is done by comparing the todo-state of the items. It
> first orders them by done state, i.e. all done items come after
> (or before) the items that are not done. After that it compares
> the todo-states with a string compare. This should probably use
> some kind of ordering information from the relevant
> org-todo-keywords sequence.
>
> * Conclusion
> So the basic question is: Should I clean up this patch to get it
> included? Is the proposed route (of not taking the priorities)
> ok? And finally: How do I sort taking the sequence order into
> consideration?
>
> Christian
>
>
> <<org.diff>>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>
>