On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 1:24 PM, Matthew Jones <bsdmatb...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey guys, I'm one of the maintainers of MobileOrg for Android. We've worked > really hard to try to implement as many of the features of org-mode as we > can and make it comfortable to use for the majority of people. A couple of > points: > > - Originally we were just storing the org files and parsing those on demand > instead of using a database. This proved extremely cumbersome when we > wanted to add more features, and it really did not scale well when people > had very large org files. We made a decision a while ago to switch to a > database almost exclusively for this reason, but there were a lot of other > smaller reasons that also made it worthwhile. > > - The reason we do syncing the way that we do is to fit into org-mode's > org-mobile-* concept. Keeping multiple sets of plain text files in sync > with emacs in the loop is no simple task. The org-mobile-* functions were > already defined and well used when I started writing the Android port of > MobileOrg. It may be suboptimal but currently it is the best and easiest > (from the development side) way to keep a remote device and an instance of > emacs in sync. I'm actually not even sure if the org-mobile-* routines are > even maintained anymore. The synchronization problem is not as easy as just > overwriting the files, however. >
I posted this suggestion at the github site: - https://github.com/matburt/mobileorg-android/issues/63#issuecomment-11391116 I think syncing over git, especially while piggybacking on the merge driver that was developed to help deal with Org syntax, might be exceptional. I can't use Dropbox since my org files at work contain confidential information and don't particularly enjoy fiddling with apache/WebDAV setup, so git and automagically knowing where to put updates from the device would be fantastic. > - If you have issues and you don't tell us then we have no way of helping > you and the problem might not go away. We try to stay on top of > showstopping issues for our users (we have an email address and a bug > tracker linked to in the app store) unfortunately some folks just leave a 1 > star review and uninstall and never contact us. > Agreed, and thanks for saying so. I try not to do this and while I don't particularly enjoy pestering you on github all the time... still choose to do so :) Thanks for commenting over here! John > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 5:28 AM, Marcin Borkowski <mb...@wmi.amu.edu.pl> > wrote: >> >> Dnia 2013-04-08, o godz. 06:52:02 >> James Harkins <jamshar...@gmail.com> napisał(a): >> >> > As it happens, one of the lead developers of mobileorg started a >> > thread on the MobileOrg-Android mailing list asking for issues that >> > need to be addressed, and features that are needed, before it's ready >> > for 1.0. >> >> Well, I didn't know about the existence if that list;). >> >> > I'm using MobileOrg and enjoying it in general. I find it terribly >> > useful and not especially cumbersome. The initial setup was a bit of a >> > trek for me, because I don't have access to dropbox where I live >> > (mainland China). Ultimately, because of unreliable connections to >> > Ubuntu One, I ended up running my own WebDAV server locally and >> > syncing at home over the WLAN. >> > >> > Otherwise, the only thing I had to adapt in my org/emacs usage was to >> > schedule appointments (C-c C-s) instead of using timestamps for them >> > (C-c .). I'm actually not crazy about that -- I'd rather use >> > timestamps -- but it does work. (Come to think of it, I should propose >> > that as one of the 1.0 issues... or check if it's changed since the >> > last time I tried.) Items with scheduled or deadline timestamps appear >> > in the Android calendar, and there is a preference in MobileOrg to >> > attach reminders automatically. (One remaining point here -- another >> > 1.0 issue -- is that creating a new node in MobileOrg with a schedule >> > or deadline doesn't show up in the phone calendar until after >> > syncing. I'll bring that up on the M/O mailing list.) >> > >> > I find that creating new nodes and minor editing of existing ones is >> > not at all inconvenient. I don't see a big issue for the workflows >> > that Marcin subsequently identified as being critical for this kind of >> > app. They're already there. >> > >> > hjh >> >> As I wrote in my other email, I'll give it a try - but I'm very much >> tempted to try to write my own implementation, for the sake of learning. >> >> Best, >> >> -- >> Marcin Borkowski >> http://octd.wmi.amu.edu.pl/en/Marcin_Borkowski >> Adam Mickiewicz University >> >
