From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: John Wiegley Subject: Re: A much simpler way of handling dependent tasks Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 03:31:22 -0400 Message-ID: <23E385D3-8DCB-4FDE-83BD-740894A8D593@newartisans.com> References: <383B6C3A-0143-4835-A78E-814841D588FB@uva.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LRiQ1-0005XY-2i for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:31:33 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LRiPz-0005V8-CM for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:31:32 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=37030 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LRiPz-0005Uy-9W for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:31:31 -0500 Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]:11976) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LRiPy-0004OD-PV for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:31:30 -0500 Received: from johnwiegley.com ([208.70.150.153] helo=mail.johnwiegley.com) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LRiPy-0004Mg-5B for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Jan 2009 02:31:30 -0500 In-Reply-To: <383B6C3A-0143-4835-A78E-814841D588FB@uva.nl> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Carsten Dominik Cc: emacs-orgmode Org-Mode On Jan 27, 2009, at 2:47 AM, Carsten Dominik wrote: > Do you think it makes sense to integrate this code into org-depend.el? Actually, I don't, since it's a completely different approach. org- depend.el as it stands now is based on a programmatic methodology, which more complex blocking schemes could be built on top of. I think this module represents something much simpler, which should be toggled by a single global boolean to indicate "on" or "off". My preference would be to see it mainlined, if that meets with your approval, Carsten. John