[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down.
From: |
Rasmus |
Subject: |
Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down. |
Date: |
Wed, 28 Sep 2011 19:34:05 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.90 (gnu/linux) |
Hi James,
Thanks for your mails.
> You can not deny, however, that even the design of this
> forum is but one example of how the Emacs community maintains its
> exclusivity. Own up to it.
It's a mailing list ≠ forum :) Anyway news is not fashionable, but sites
like Gmane makes it quite available. The problem is not news but that
people generally does not know news.
> But for those who are following the statements on comparing org-mode
> to commercial substitutes like Taskpaper
It's only a substitute if you so desire.
> In order for org-mode to be attractive as an alternative to popular
> self-help like GTD, Covey and the market of task managers both digital
> and paper that exist, this community would need to take all this
> extensive documentation and package it.
I simply can grasp this. The manual is provided in several flavors; if
anything the manual is lacking in some areas, but in general it's great.
Several tutorials, specifically on GTD exists on Worg (our `wiki').
> Do not confuse content with transparency.
Do not confuse a learning curve with transparency. Algebra, philosophy
and economics also take time.
> Should open-source software not concern itself with good
> bullet points?
Emacs and therefore Org is free software.
> Does this imply that I’m not appreciative of the work?
Course not, please keep voicing your opinion and let me voice mine :)
> There’s an opportunity cost with finding the time for even this
> thread, which I’m hoping we can agree should not be a barrier of entry
> for those who are simply interested in trying org-mode. As it stands,
> however, just trying org-mode takes lots of reading if just to install
> correctly. That’s all I’m saying.
By now several packages of Emacs for beginners exists. On mac there is
the Aquamacs, on Windows I think there is something called ErgoMacs or
something like that. Plus there are various Emacs Starter Kits.
> Text is but one way that people learn. If you’re documenting sofware,
> it leans towards rational, logical, and linear thinking.
This method has proven evolutionary stable so far, has it not?
> Some people require a full-picture model first seeing things from many
> angles. Other’s prefer trial and error, and others, still, enjoy
> hypotheticals.
All of these seems compatible to a linear presentation. All text is
linear but you may elect a certain order of texts suiting your needs.
> People can adopt different strategies along the way. But to insist on
> only one method of learning and sharing, while being concerned that
> you’re not meeting a larger audience is tantamount to calling the rest
> of the class stupid, or simply a manner of dishonesty with one’s own
> motivations.
This is the greatness of a freedom of ideas. People may opt in on their
favorite approach, no?
> Maybe what would be helpful is some bridge instruction: “Graduating
> from Taskpaper: so you’re ready to try org-mode. What to expect:” I do
> find that if I have an orientation point, even if it wasn’t the best
> decision in the first place, I have a better reference as to the
> changes I would envision and what the value of future options would
> be.
You are talking about specific to general `solutions'. As many have
pointed out this will necessarily lead to a restricted set of
possibilities. It further assumes that there is an `appropriate' or
`encouraged' way of utilizing Org. Aside from a few hard-coded¹ symbols
this is very much not the case. I use Org for writing first and task
management second. Other use it for management first.
That being said Worg is open. If you feel a particular tutorial
(usually specific to specific documents) is missing feel free to add it,
/or/ describe what is lacking. For instance theoretical as well as
practical toughs on GTD is widely discussed on Worg.
> what’s the ethical ambiguity in earning a living from setting up
> management systems for people and institutions, even if you’re using
> open-source material?
There is no ethical ambiguity. It would be selling a service. This is
encouraged. The ethical issues is concerned with not providing people
with the opportunity to `remix' and re-share to use a slightly different
terminology (see freedom 0-3 of free software definition).
–Rasmus
Footnotes:
¹ Is that still the case or was everything such a `*' changed to
variables?
--
Sent from my Emacs
- [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down., James Levine, 2011/09/27
- Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down., Jude DaShiell, 2011/09/28
- Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down., Eric S Fraga, 2011/09/28
- Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down., Jambunathan K, 2011/09/28
- Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down., Jambunathan K, 2011/09/28
- Re: [O] would take more than an org-mode strip-down., Carsten Dominik, 2011/09/30