Tim Cross writes:
> Changing defaults is far more problematic as it has the potential to
> impact a large number of existing users who have their environment
> configured the way they like already.
Yes, indeed.
--
Bastien
On Tue, Feb 04, 2020 at 09:38:57PM -0600, Matthew Lundin wrote:
> Adam Porter writes:
>
> > There may be improvements to be made, but the defaults shouldn't be set
> > to match the preferences of any one user. Remember that people have
> > been using Org for years, and theming and faces are very
On 2/4/20, Matthew Lundin wrote:
> and they are best addressed through add-on themes and packages.
agreed.
Adam Porter writes:
> There may be improvements to be made, but the defaults shouldn't be set
> to match the preferences of any one user. Remember that people have
> been using Org for years, and theming and faces are very personal. ;)
I strongly agree. All of the changes mentioned in these le
As Tim said, this is really a matter for theming. There are several
themes and example configs available that make Org buffers "pretty".
For example:
https://github.com/kunalb/poet
https://github.com/jonnay/org-beautify-theme
https://lepisma.xyz/2017/10/28/ricing-org-mode/
As well, faces are eas
It strikes me that much of what seems to be required for 'legible' org
would possibly be handled by an org 'theme'. As it is possible to
combine themes, it should be possible to create a 'org pros theme',
which users could add to their existing theme. This theme could adjust
face sizes, colours,
Org intersperses bits of code in prose, such as datestamps, drawers,
keywords, etc. The code distracts when reading the prose. The solution
is to make the code less prominent.
That way it's easy to read the paragraphs of prose without
interruption. If one wants to focus on a code bit, it's still e
