BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Wanrong Lin]

Hi, Carsten,

I am excited to try out the new features in 5.19, but one thing I tried 
first is to see whether the "task disappearing" behavior for repeat TODO 
items has changed. Seems it did not. I am not sure whether this is 
considered a bug, but in short the symptom is this:

Suppose I have a repeat task:

* TODO [#A] A repeat task test
  SCHEDULED: <2008-01-15 Tue +1w>

And today is Friday, Jan 18. The task will show in my agenda for today. 
But, if I change the above task to:

* TODO [#A] A repeat task test
  SCHEDULED: <2008-01-14 Mon +1w>

It will disappear from my agenda for today. But it still shows up in my 
agenda for Monday, Jan 14, and Monday, Jan 21. It seems to me that once 
today's date is closer to the next occurrence of a repeat item than the 
overdue one, the item will disappear.

I guess this will push me to finish a repeat task ASAP, but still, I am 
a little bit nervous that something I am suppose to do may disappear 
from my agenda.

Thanks a lot for taking a look of this.

Wanrong

Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Dennis J Lin]

Salutations!

Please note that I'm sending this from gnus talking to gmane, and this
is the first time that I've tried posting anything to gmane (or using
gnus), so apologies if the electrons don't exactly align.

Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> writes:

> repeat TODO items has changed. Seems it did not. I am not sure whether
> this is considered a bug, but in short the symptom is this:
>
> Suppose I have a repeat task:
>
> * TODO [#A] A repeat task test
>  SCHEDULED: <2008-01-15 Tue +1w>
>
> And today is Friday, Jan 18. The task will show in my agenda for
> today. But, if I change the above task to:
>
> * TODO [#A] A repeat task test
>  SCHEDULED: <2008-01-14 Mon +1w>
>
> It will disappear from my agenda for today. But it still shows up in
> my agenda for Monday, Jan 14, and Monday, Jan 21. It seems to me that
> once today's date is closer to the next occurrence of a repeat item
> than the overdue one, the item will disappear.

I've noticed this, and I've actually been carrying a personal patch
for this -- (yes, there is a TODO entry to write it up an send it in,
which is why I'm writing this...)

Basically, in org-agenda-get-scheduled, we call
org-time-string-to-absolute passing in d1 (the day that we're trying
to get agenda items for.)  The problems is that if d1 is today, we
will get the closest day, which may be in the future, leading to the
problem.  The patch that I've found was to not pass in d1 if todayp is
true.

I have a 4 line patch implementing this (and I probably should write
another one to fix a similar problem with deadlines), but I've not
signed a FSF release, so I don't know if you want me to post my code
here.

Dennis Lin

Re: Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Carsten Dominik]

Please post your code, you can always do this, the copyright question
only star when we decide to use it.  And even then, 4 lines is very  
little.

- Carsten

On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:24 PM, Dennis J Lin wrote:

> Salutations!
>
> Please note that I'm sending this from gnus talking to gmane, and this
> is the first time that I've tried posting anything to gmane (or using
> gnus), so apologies if the electrons don't exactly align.
>
> Wanrong Lin <wanrong.lin@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> repeat TODO items has changed. Seems it did not. I am not sure  
>> whether
>> this is considered a bug, but in short the symptom is this:
>>
>> Suppose I have a repeat task:
>>
>> * TODO [#A] A repeat task test
>> SCHEDULED: <2008-01-15 Tue +1w>
>>
>> And today is Friday, Jan 18. The task will show in my agenda for
>> today. But, if I change the above task to:
>>
>> * TODO [#A] A repeat task test
>> SCHEDULED: <2008-01-14 Mon +1w>
>>
>> It will disappear from my agenda for today. But it still shows up in
>> my agenda for Monday, Jan 14, and Monday, Jan 21. It seems to me that
>> once today's date is closer to the next occurrence of a repeat item
>> than the overdue one, the item will disappear.
>
> I've noticed this, and I've actually been carrying a personal patch
> for this -- (yes, there is a TODO entry to write it up an send it in,
> which is why I'm writing this...)
>
> Basically, in org-agenda-get-scheduled, we call
> org-time-string-to-absolute passing in d1 (the day that we're trying
> to get agenda items for.)  The problems is that if d1 is today, we
> will get the closest day, which may be in the future, leading to the
> problem.  The patch that I've found was to not pass in d1 if todayp is
> true.
>
> I have a 4 line patch implementing this (and I probably should write
> another one to fix a similar problem with deadlines), but I've not
> signed a FSF release, so I don't know if you want me to post my code
> here.
>
> Dennis Lin
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Dennis J Lin]

Salutations!

> Please post your code, you can always do this, the copyright question
> only star when we decide to use it.  And even then, 4 lines is very little.

Sure, please see it below :-)

Dennis Lin

>>
>> Basically, in org-agenda-get-scheduled, we call
>> org-time-string-to-absolute passing in d1 (the day that we're trying
>> to get agenda items for.)  The problems is that if d1 is today, we
>> will get the closest day, which may be in the future, leading to the
>> problem.  The patch that I've found was to not pass in d1 if todayp is
>> true.
>>
>> I have a 4 line patch implementing this (and I probably should write
>> another one to fix a similar problem with deadlines), but I've not
>> signed a FSF release, so I don't know if you want me to post my code
>> here.

Now, this patch is now quite old (it was for 5.08) but it should still
apply cleanly.  Looking at it, it might be whitespace damaged, and
there should be a similar change for the get-deadline.  However, I
think it gets the idea across (and seems to fix the problem for me.)

Dennis Lin

--- old/org.el	2007-09-05 03:16:41.000000000 -0500
+++ new/org.el	2007-09-09 00:50:36.000000000 -0500
@@ -18676,7 +18676,9 @@
 	(org-agenda-skip)
 	(setq s (match-string 1)
 	      pos (1- (match-beginning 1))
-	      d2 (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1)
+	      d2 (if todayp
+                     (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1))
+                   (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1))
 	      diff (- d2 d1))
 	(setq pastschedp (and todayp (< diff 0)))
 	;; When to show a scheduled item in the calendar:

Re: Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Carsten Dominik]

Hi Dennis, thanks for the patch.

I am not sure yet if you are using the right condition though.  It  
seems to me that extending the late-warning-period makes sens only for  
repeating *tasks*, where the base date keeps changing each time you  
mark this entry as DONE.  So maybe the condition should be that it is  
today *and* that the item is a task marked by a TODO keyword.

Or: maybe for Scheduled, we should no relate to the *nearest* match of  
the repeater, but to the most recent one.  This way you would get over- 
due warnings right up to the day where the next occurrence of this  
item is scheduled.  So you would never loose sight on the item.

Hmmmm.  More discussion please!

- Carsten

On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:55 PM, Dennis J Lin wrote:

> Salutations!
>
>> Please post your code, you can always do this, the copyright question
>> only star when we decide to use it.  And even then, 4 lines is very  
>> little.
>
> Sure, please see it below :-)
>
> Dennis Lin
>
>>>
>>> Basically, in org-agenda-get-scheduled, we call
>>> org-time-string-to-absolute passing in d1 (the day that we're trying
>>> to get agenda items for.)  The problems is that if d1 is today, we
>>> will get the closest day, which may be in the future, leading to the
>>> problem.  The patch that I've found was to not pass in d1 if  
>>> todayp is
>>> true.
>>>
>>> I have a 4 line patch implementing this (and I probably should write
>>> another one to fix a similar problem with deadlines), but I've not
>>> signed a FSF release, so I don't know if you want me to post my code
>>> here.
>
> Now, this patch is now quite old (it was for 5.08) but it should still
> apply cleanly.  Looking at it, it might be whitespace damaged, and
> there should be a similar change for the get-deadline.  However, I
> think it gets the idea across (and seems to fix the problem for me.)
>
> Dennis Lin
>
> --- old/org.el	2007-09-05 03:16:41.000000000 -0500
> +++ new/org.el	2007-09-09 00:50:36.000000000 -0500
> @@ -18676,7 +18676,9 @@
> 	(org-agenda-skip)
> 	(setq s (match-string 1)
> 	      pos (1- (match-beginning 1))
> -	      d2 (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1)
> +	      d2 (if todayp
> +                     (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1))
> +                   (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1))
> 	      diff (- d2 d1))
> 	(setq pastschedp (and todayp (< diff 0)))
> 	;; When to show a scheduled item in the calendar:

Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Bernt Hansen]

I'm using the agenda to keep my important tasks 'in my face' so they get
dealt with.  This is normally the only place my repeating tasks show up.
If I miss a repeating task for a few days for some reason the worst
thing (for me) that can happen is it falls off the agenda for some time
without being completed.  In that case I lose it until it comes up again
and now it's really late.

It's fine if the date resets on the next repeating date if it remains
undone that long but I'd really prefer the task to stay on the agenda no
matter what - until it is completed (and moves to some future date).

Just my two cents :)

Bernt

Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:

> Hi Dennis, thanks for the patch.
>
> I am not sure yet if you are using the right condition though.  It
> seems to me that extending the late-warning-period makes sens only for
> repeating *tasks*, where the base date keeps changing each time you
> mark this entry as DONE.  So maybe the condition should be that it is
> today *and* that the item is a task marked by a TODO keyword.
>
> Or: maybe for Scheduled, we should no relate to the *nearest* match of
> the repeater, but to the most recent one.  This way you would get
> over- 
> due warnings right up to the day where the next occurrence of this
> item is scheduled.  So you would never loose sight on the item.
>
> Hmmmm.  More discussion please!
>
> - Carsten
>
> On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:55 PM, Dennis J Lin wrote:
>
>> Salutations!
>>
>>> Please post your code, you can always do this, the copyright question
>>> only star when we decide to use it.  And even then, 4 lines is very
>>> little.
>>
>> Sure, please see it below :-)
>>
>> Dennis Lin
>>
>>>>
>>>> Basically, in org-agenda-get-scheduled, we call
>>>> org-time-string-to-absolute passing in d1 (the day that we're trying
>>>> to get agenda items for.)  The problems is that if d1 is today, we
>>>> will get the closest day, which may be in the future, leading to the
>>>> problem.  The patch that I've found was to not pass in d1 if
>>>> todayp is
>>>> true.
>>>>
>>>> I have a 4 line patch implementing this (and I probably should write
>>>> another one to fix a similar problem with deadlines), but I've not
>>>> signed a FSF release, so I don't know if you want me to post my code
>>>> here.
>>
>> Now, this patch is now quite old (it was for 5.08) but it should still
>> apply cleanly.  Looking at it, it might be whitespace damaged, and
>> there should be a similar change for the get-deadline.  However, I
>> think it gets the idea across (and seems to fix the problem for me.)
>>
>> Dennis Lin
>>
>> --- old/org.el	2007-09-05 03:16:41.000000000 -0500
>> +++ new/org.el	2007-09-09 00:50:36.000000000 -0500
>> @@ -18676,7 +18676,9 @@
>> 	(org-agenda-skip)
>> 	(setq s (match-string 1)
>> 	      pos (1- (match-beginning 1))
>> -	      d2 (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1)
>> +	      d2 (if todayp
>> +                     (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1))
>> +                   (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1))
>> 	      diff (- d2 d1))
>> 	(setq pastschedp (and todayp (< diff 0)))
>> 	;; When to show a scheduled item in the calendar:
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode

Re: Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Dennis J Lin]

Salutations!

> Hi Dennis, thanks for the patch.
>
> I am not sure yet if you are using the right condition though.  It seems to 
> me that extending the late-warning-period makes sens only for repeating 
> *tasks*, where the base date keeps changing each time you mark this entry 
> as DONE.  So maybe the condition should be that it is today *and* that the 
> item is a task marked by a TODO keyword.

Hmm, that may be -- every entry that has a date is a TODO for me.  I
would think that a non-todo entry (repeating or not) should only occur
on the day(s) where it's scheduled, since there is no way to mark it
"done" and get it off of today's agenda.

> Or: maybe for Scheduled, we should no relate to the *nearest* match of the 
> repeater, but to the most recent one.  This way you would get over-due 
> warnings right up to the day where the next occurrence of this item is 
> scheduled.  So you would never loose sight on the item.

However, if we do this, we lose information on *how* overdue a
particular item is.  I tend to keep things on the agenda and let the
large numbers shame me into getting things done...

Dennis Lin

Re: Re: BUG?: repeat items disappears in agenda

[Wanrong Lin]

I prefer the same way. I wish to have full confidence that anything 
scheduled but not done will show up in my agenda.

Thanks.

Wanrong

Bernt Hansen wrote:
> I'm using the agenda to keep my important tasks 'in my face' so they get
> dealt with.  This is normally the only place my repeating tasks show up.
> If I miss a repeating task for a few days for some reason the worst
> thing (for me) that can happen is it falls off the agenda for some time
> without being completed.  In that case I lose it until it comes up again
> and now it's really late.
>
> It's fine if the date resets on the next repeating date if it remains
> undone that long but I'd really prefer the task to stay on the agenda no
> matter what - until it is completed (and moves to some future date).
>
> Just my two cents :)
>
> Bernt
>
> Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl> writes:
>
>   
>> Hi Dennis, thanks for the patch.
>>
>> I am not sure yet if you are using the right condition though.  It
>> seems to me that extending the late-warning-period makes sens only for
>> repeating *tasks*, where the base date keeps changing each time you
>> mark this entry as DONE.  So maybe the condition should be that it is
>> today *and* that the item is a task marked by a TODO keyword.
>>
>> Or: maybe for Scheduled, we should no relate to the *nearest* match of
>> the repeater, but to the most recent one.  This way you would get
>> over- 
>> due warnings right up to the day where the next occurrence of this
>> item is scheduled.  So you would never loose sight on the item.
>>
>> Hmmmm.  More discussion please!
>>
>> - Carsten
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2008, at 10:55 PM, Dennis J Lin wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Salutations!
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Please post your code, you can always do this, the copyright question
>>>> only star when we decide to use it.  And even then, 4 lines is very
>>>> little.
>>>>         
>>> Sure, please see it below :-)
>>>
>>> Dennis Lin
>>>
>>>       
>>>>> Basically, in org-agenda-get-scheduled, we call
>>>>> org-time-string-to-absolute passing in d1 (the day that we're trying
>>>>> to get agenda items for.)  The problems is that if d1 is today, we
>>>>> will get the closest day, which may be in the future, leading to the
>>>>> problem.  The patch that I've found was to not pass in d1 if
>>>>> todayp is
>>>>> true.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have a 4 line patch implementing this (and I probably should write
>>>>> another one to fix a similar problem with deadlines), but I've not
>>>>> signed a FSF release, so I don't know if you want me to post my code
>>>>> here.
>>>>>           
>>> Now, this patch is now quite old (it was for 5.08) but it should still
>>> apply cleanly.  Looking at it, it might be whitespace damaged, and
>>> there should be a similar change for the get-deadline.  However, I
>>> think it gets the idea across (and seems to fix the problem for me.)
>>>
>>> Dennis Lin
>>>
>>> --- old/org.el	2007-09-05 03:16:41.000000000 -0500
>>> +++ new/org.el	2007-09-09 00:50:36.000000000 -0500
>>> @@ -18676,7 +18676,9 @@
>>> 	(org-agenda-skip)
>>> 	(setq s (match-string 1)
>>> 	      pos (1- (match-beginning 1))
>>> -	      d2 (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1)
>>> +	      d2 (if todayp
>>> +                     (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1))
>>> +                   (org-time-string-to-absolute (match-string 1) d1))
>>> 	      diff (- d2 d1))
>>> 	(setq pastschedp (and todayp (< diff 0)))
>>> 	;; When to show a scheduled item in the calendar:
>>>       
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
>> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
>> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
>> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>>     
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Emacs-orgmode mailing list
> Remember: use `Reply All' to send replies to the list.
> Emacs-orgmode@gnu.org
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode
>