Re: [O] Cloning tasks subtrees when repeating?

[Matthew Sauer]

Have you looked into:
C-c C-x c     (org-clone-subtree-with-time-shift)
Clone a subtree by making a number of sibling copies of it. You will
be prompted for the number of copies to make, and you can also specify
if any timestamps in the entry should be shifted. This can be useful,
for example, to create a number of tasks related to a series of
lectures to prepare. For more details, see the docstring of the
command org-clone-subtree-with-time-shift.


Your usecase may need some modification or adding this to a custom
function for it to work.

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 1:35 PM, Lindsay Todd <address@hidden> wrote:
> Folks: I am looking for a nice org-mode-ish way to manage a task check
> list that repeats regularly.  I would like to log, then archive, which
> items actually are completed when I close the task.  (It isn't
> uncommon to have a few open.)
>
> Here is the situation: Every couple of weeks, I have an opportunity to
> work through a checklist of about 40-50 system maintenance tasks,
> organized under a repeating TODO-task item.  At the end of the
> maintenance time period, I close the task (which reschedules nicely),
> then cut-n-paste the partly-marked list to the LOGBOOK drawer (as well
> as any additional notes I want to log).  Then I manually clear out the
> check list...
>
> This is not too much work, but of course it would be nice if the
> checklist could automatically be saved, then cleared.  But there is
> another problem: my LOGBOOK drawer is getting very large, and
> checklist processing has been slowing (I can no longer use it).
>
> What would be nice is if I could close the task, the repeated entry
> would be an entirely new task.  Perhaps it is a clone of the task I
> just closed (with a new date), or perhaps it is populated from some
> sort of template.  The important thing is I need a new task entry, so
> I can archive the old entry, and still have a new entry with a new
> date.
>
> Has anyone else had a similar use-case that could suggest an approach
> they've used?
>
> Thanks!
>
> /Lindsay
>
>