Re: [O] Bug: Recurring items NEVER show up in timeline unaccompanied

[Mark S]

Hello Carsten et al,

--- On Thu, 3/24/11, Carsten Dominik <address@hidden> wrote:

> 1. Be satisfied with the way things are, just realize
>    that repeaters only show up on the first date when
>    the event happens for the first time.

This would mean that you could never *trust* the
timeline when dealing with events more than a week or
two out. You would always have that lingering worry
that you forgot to bump one of the repeaters.

> 2. Use the agenda, restricted to a single file, for a
>    time range you specify.  This has the advantage
>    that also diary sexps will work properly - the
>    timeline currently has no way to deal with these.

This would be great if there were a "sparse"
agenda. There isn't a way to make the agenda not show
empty days is there? As it is, if you make an agenda
extending out a year, you will have to wade through
several hundred lines worth of empty days.

> 3. Change the section of the timeline code that
>    produces the list of interesting dates.

That seems like a good solution. Is it difficult?

> 4. Define a variable that will make the timeline
>    always look at *every* date in the range covered
>    by the file.  And live with the fact that
>    constructing the view might take long.  Maybe it
>    will not even to terribly long if you really use
>    this view for single projects.  This would be easy
>    to implement.

This would work too, I think. Creating an agenda that
goes out one year only took about 3 seconds on my
not-state-of-the-art machine. Presumably the timeline
would be faster, since it wouldn't produce all the
extra gap lines.

Actually, when I tried to make a year long agenda using
v-y I spent just about as much getting past the "are
you sure" screens as it took to build the agenda.

The ideal solution would be that the Timeline view
would process dates exactly like the agenda, including
multiple-files, but display them like the traditional
timeline, with ranges of dates omitted.

Mark