Hello, Nikolay Kudryavtsev <nikolay.kudryavt...@gmail.com> writes:
> The first is that drop in clock reports now use :scope file by > default, instead of :scope subtree. Indeed. This is because clocktable default properties include :scope property. I removed it. Thank you. > The second is that the clock report function is set up in some weird > way that it gets broken if you use icicles. Gonna look into it > further, not sure whether org or icicles is the bad actor here. The > behavior I'm seeing is as follows: > > The command spawns empty table with :scope file, asks for a file, when > I select that file, it asks for a function and I have no idea which > function should I choose here. I don't use Icicles, but I cannot reproduce it. What are the exact steps to do so? > The third is the removal of C-c C-x C-r. I've read the discussion > there, but it seems like nobody really wanted it removed, this is just > a consequence of refactoring. So, can we get C-c C-x C-r > org-clock-report back, if only as a closure over > org-dynamic-block-insert-dblock? I don't see the need for that. You can, however, bind `C-c C-x C-r' to `org-clock-report' in your config. > Also, ever since that Stardiviner's commit the dynamic reloading of > org seems to be broken on master. When I try to I get: > > Symbol’s function definition is void: org-dynamic-block-define You seem to have a mixed installation. This function only exists in development branch, i.e., Org 9.3, not ELPA. > Another thing, since org is moving towards unifying dynamic blocks, > maybe the next step is to add begin_src blocks into the mix in > org-dynamic-block-insert-dblock? It seems that they historically have > different syntax, but are in practice the same thing. That's actually > one place where I could use a wizard. My practice differs. I don't see them as the same thing. Their syntax is vaguely related, but that's all. Note you can insert source blocks with 'C-c C-,` > And why the function is called org-dynamic-block-insert-dblock and not > org-insert-dblock? Seems redundant to me. Hysterical raisins, I assume. > Also can someone explain how do I get from org elpa version to the git > commit it's based on? E. g., in org-version.el I have > "9.2.1-33-g029cf6-elpaplus" but g029cf6 does not seem like a real > commit in the git repo. Drop the "g". The relative commit is "029cf6". Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou