Re: One vs many directories

[Jean Louis]

* Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com> [2020-11-29 10:52]:
> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
> 
> > When task is assigned to somebody notification of a deadline or alerts
> > are definitely useful for me. But they are are useful for those
> > conducting the tasks.
> >
> > Thus integration to remind those *related* people to the assigned
> > tasks and their deadlines or schedules would be useful.
> 
> I think that can be done by extending alert.el package (which org-alert
> is based on). alert.el allows the user to define custom alert styles,
> including sending sms or email.

Yes, that is great.

We need more integration. There are low level packages but we need
integration, high level, user accessible and for users useful
features.

Emacs is itself useful but there may be long process until user starts
doing some programming. Then it becomes trivial to alert self or othre
people by SMS, yet majority of users will not have that functionality
unless we make it somehow.

org-set-reminder by SMS could send it to assigned person. This is for
me so important that it deserves menu item where user can assign that
reminder. Once assigned it would run in intervals until task has been
closed.

org-send-task-by-email would find out which user is assigned to
(feature is not built-in) and send it to assigned user
automatically. It is trivial, but we do not have that. One click and
it should go. 

> >> I agree that org-agenda has many issues that cannot be easily solved
> >> because of its complexity. However, everything you describe (including
> >> multi-occur) can also be achieved with org-ql
> >> (https://github.com/alphapapa/org-ql) - analogue of SQL query language
> >> for org-mode (with more optimisations in comparison with org-agenda). 
> >
> > Definitely good only too much low-level. Users need finished functions
> > that integrate stuff. To adopt myself to org-ql would mean to read
> > documentations, meanings, and starting with some functions, while this
> > may be possible for me that approach is not user friendly as users
> > need integration and accessible interfaces. 
> 
> Not really. Searching in org-ql is made very intuitive - just like you
> would search in google. There are multiple interactive commands:
> - helm-org-ql :: The user simply types search keywords and the commands
>   shows all the matching headlines. For example, user can type
>   "headline:Doe call todo:WAIT tags:invoice" and get all kinds of
>   matches as he/she types
> - org-ql-view :: shows the menu for different pre-customised searches
>   like "Calendar: This week" or "Overview: NEXT tasks"

That is game changer.

> 
> > Example of lack of integration would be to tell to user to simply
> > construct the link in the form: [[Here][Link]] and that alone would
> > require some thinking and learning. 
> 
> There is also (slower) helm-org (https://github.com/emacs-helm/helm-org)
> offering similar interface to helm-org-ql, but also adding an option to
> do various actions with the selected tasks, like inserting correctly
> formatted link. The same can be done in helm-org-ql. I think the author
> plans to extend that command in the near future. Or one can add extra
> actions as needed - it is trivial to do in helm.
> 
> > Good integration for org-ql would be a wizard that can add to the list
> > of various queries and offers users various ways to search such as
> > searching by headline, tags, or having both tags involved, date,
> > deadlines and so on.
> 
> All these are already available. The user can search tags:tag1,tag2,...,
> headline:word1,word2 (or shortly hl:word1,...), scheduled:on=today,
> deadline:from=-7,to=2020-12-01

org-ql is indeed a wizard for searching agenda and looks better than
default.

Jean