Re: Migrating from HUGO to org-publish
Alejandro, Have you tried ox-hugo? There's an org exporter to Hugo. I use it and it works pretty much flawlessly. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: issue tracker?
> I think issue tracking could happen on a mailing list. If you tag an > issue's subject line with OPEN: or CLOSE:, a bot could mail a summary of > the OPEN: issues to the list periodically (in theory). Something like that would be nice; the bot could even store such info in an org file that could be exported the html occasionally too. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: issue tracker?
> This idea that the tools used by a potential contributor are inadequate > misses the point. If the intention is to keep a project going, or better > yet increase the number of contributors, tools have to be used that will > be convenient and familiar to those thinking about contributing. > > For better or worse, the workflows embodied by Github and Gitlab are > familiar to the current generation of potential contributors upon which > sustaining a project will depend. > > Holding up the 'Linux uses email for development and thus any project > doing similar is right' fails to recognize the peculiar nature of the > Linux kernel (and its developers) and neglects the thousands of projects > that have increased their visibility and participation by using tools > such as Github. I agree that Github/Gitlab may not be the best choice > owing to their stance or implementation related to software freedom, but > an honest discussion of alternatives seems prudent. This is the point I am trying to (un-eloquently) make. I'm seeing a bunch of younger coders interested in emacs (mostly spacemacs and doom); but, they get frustrated with the ancient (to them) dev practices. I'm not advocating any rash decisions; simply, whether the project would benefit from incorporating some sort of simple issue tracker, so that new contributors could readily see open tasks / issues / submit bug reports. My biggest issue with a ML only approach is that it's not easy to see what's an open issue unless you spend a long time searching and reading the ML. And I feel that that time could be better spent learning the code base instead of reading the ML. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: issue tracker?
So, I definitely agree that using Github / Gitlab does expose you to tracking messes and that is something to shun. I figured a self-hosted Gogs instance (which is already being hosted at https://code.orgmode.org/bzg/org-mode) would fix the "tracking" issue. I think an actual issue tracker has merit to large projects. And I don't think simply saying "we've always done it through a ML" or "$FOO project is bigger than us and uses a ML" is good enough. $FOO project may very well increase efficiency, code quality, and/or participation by implementing an issue tracker. A project to consider then, might be some sort of system that interfaces with the ML (as well as a simple REST api so that issues could be submitted from inside emacs directly), that creates some sort of org-based issue tracker, and then ox-html exports to a static web page or pages. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: issue tracker?
(I also don’t understand the knee jerk response away from cookies / JavaScript). Those are just parts of the modern web... Cookies for state and persistent login and JavaScript for making the web page interactive. Are you saying you’d want some sort of REST api instead and the website would just be a view into that? -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: issue tracker?
My apologies. I thought Gogs was the repository for org as I that is what is linked from the homepage. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: issue tracker?
Doesn’t Gogs have a nice issue tracker functionality? -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: Org-list: Add back fancy description list indentation
This just might be the functionality that makes me learn elisp. :) -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Re: Org-list: Add back fancy description list indentation
It just seems like a regression to me instead of a fix. Functionality was removed instead of fixed. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
Org-list: Add back fancy description list indentation
Hi all, Was there really not a way to keep fancy description list indentation instead of removing it entirely? I have almost a decade of org files that use description lists, and it really helps have the description items called out from the description text. Is there a simple way to add this functionality back in? Perhaps as some sort of variable like `org-use-fancy-description-list-indentation` instead of throwing it out entirely? Here's the commit I'm referring to: https://code.orgmode.org/bzg/org-mode/commit/683df456a41a2b0e308bdbf746f5db0235a6058a Thanks. -- James Miller james.ryland.mil...@gmail.com
