6 ms·

Reading through the list of changes, I am very happy that I moved away from org mode. - New syntax for export blocks - org-file-apps no longer accepts S-expre

Reading through the list of changes, I am very happy that I moved away from org mode. - New syntax for export blocks - org-file-apps no longer accepts S-expressions as commands - Preparation and completion functions in publishing projects change signature - Old Babel header properties are no longer supported So in other words, for the classes I teach every two years, I can forget about being able to open up my previous files and have them just work. This was a constant battle and is pretty much unique to org mode.

Veen 10y ago
What do you use instead of org mode?
- bachmeier 10y ago
  For lecture notes/papers/website documents, a system of Pandoc and scripts does all that I need (usually Pandoc is sufficient). For my calendar, first I moved to the system that came with my email, then eventually to a small script I wrote so I could have things the way I like.
  - tmalsburg2 10y ago
    Org supports literate programming and that's what makes it so attractive for writing teaching materials. Pandoc only gives me static documents.
- noir_lord 10y ago
  All though not a direct replacement I use use a program called CherryTree which is amazing, it does all the usual stuff (hierarchical notes) etc, what I really like is you can do everything from the keyboard and it allows you to embed code and stuff as well. Don't be put off by the website the product is much better than the site would imply. http://www.giuspen.com/cherrytree/ http://www.giuspen.com/cherrytree/ One of the things I like is that you can store notes in an SQLite DB and that makes syncing easy via Dropbox, if you pass it the path to the storage file on the CLI it will open that as well so I have it bound to a hotkey combination which lets me quickly open it, edit and close so it stays out the way when I don't need it and is there when I do.
  - base698 10y ago
    I have my org directory versioned with git and persisted with gitlab. Accomplishes the same thing.
e40 10y ago
Does it do automatic conversion, so if you had used it continuously it would have just worked? (not a user of org mode, just curious)
- NhanH 10y ago
  Last time org syntax was changed that affected me, it did not do automatic conversion (it was just last release, actually). In that case, however there was a code snippet to repair them. You have to know and read the changelogs for them though.
- bachmeier 10y ago
  The one that hit hard was when they changed the exporters (I believe it was the change from 7 to 8). Documentation was limited, but it included gems reminding the reader that it's a lot of work to write documentation, but rest assured that it would eventually happen. Nothing was automated and frankly, I couldn't even figure out a non-automated way to update the files, as I could not find a replacement for some of the functionality I had been using.
plg 10y ago
I have experienced the same thing at least twice in the last 5 years ... automated scripts for compiling and uploading >50 .org files for a course website, suddenly fails. Spend 3 days chasing down why. Small naming change in an org function. Now again? It's very frustrating.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  Happens with every piece of software that is actively developed past initial release. In other words, c'est la vie.
  - carterehsmith 10y ago
    Hmmmm wait. I don't see how "every piece of software" is like that. Opening an old Excel or Word file does not randomly fail (last time I checked). Or, if you pick some circa-2005 Java library, it still works. So it is not clear why org-mode gets a free pass here. At least they could prompt you that "your stuff will not work" if you upgrade.
    - TeMPOraL 10y ago
      Excel or Word will randomly fail if the file is old enough. But ok, so Word/Excel can upconvert files if needed. Fair. But does a new document opened in the current Office program look the same? And I mean precisely the same, with fonts and sizes and indentation saved? And what about UI? Don't features appear/disappear? As for Java - it's mostly compatibile in source and in bytecode: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-... like with org-mode, the compatibility is broken in some weird cases. Consider also the file formats. Both Office formats and Java bytecode are binary formats not meant to be read by humans[0]. They can afford backward-compatibility measures. Nobody will bat an eye when new updated version of an opcode will get called CALL2, CALL3, CALL_FIXED, etc. Nor will they care if version flags start showing up in document formatting tags. Org-mode, on the other hand, is a thin layer of visual formatting over a plain text file. Except in few cases (links, folding), it doesn't change the visible contents of the file compared to opening it as unformatted text! In org-mode, your text file is your UI. It is meant to be edited by hand. So you can't clutter the file with backward-compatibility measures. Now org-mode provides some elisp scripts to upconvert older documents. They probably don't cover every case, but that's kind of normal - you can't cover everything, and e.g. the cases discussed here today are some pretty advanced / rare ones. Still, it's cheap to manually fix org-mode files - you can just open it and take a look! Try that with Java bytecode or Office formats. You can't - hence the additional effort in ensuring compatibility between versions. -- [0] - Yes, I know new Office format is zipped XML; it's still not meant to be read or modified manually.
cheez 10y ago
Oh that sucks. I hope the maintainers read this thread.
- bzg 10y ago
  I do read this thread, and I'm very receptive to the "oh-no-please-dont-break-backward-compatibility-again" complaints. The best course of action is (1) to try to find help on the mailing list for new functions to ease the migration to the new syntactic rules (there is one already in the release notes) and (2) to raise your voice on the mailing list and support those who share the same view. I've been a release manager for 9.0, not the real maintainer, so things may have slipped in directions I didn't have time to carefully review. If I manage to get involved again as a real maintainer, I will enforce syntactic stability and backward compatibility as much as possible.
  - cheez 10y ago
    Thanks for your contribution. The thing is that if it isn't easy for code contributors to maintain backwards compatibility, they won't.
  - leblancfg 10y ago
    Breaking backwards compatibility happens, and I don't see it as too much of a threat to the project. What might be nice is, for every release, to provide a script that would update your org files to the current standard. Maybe such files even exist, but they would need to be closer to the users' hands.
  - theophrastus 10y ago
    How about putting together an upgrade tool in the same spirit of python's 2to3 [1]? If not actually a corrective tool it could discover and report likely outmoded constructs. Or even form the basis of a proper org-lint? In anycase, it must be said that many of us simply could not stay organized without efforts like yours, and we're greatly appreciative! (couldn't write a grant without it anymore) [1] https://docs.python.org/2/library/2to3.html https://docs.python.org/2/library/2to3.html
drieddust 10y ago
But doesn't this work against the conception that we should be using Emacs and Org-mode to future proof ourselves.
- peterkelly 10y ago
  Yes. "But it's just text, so you can access it in any program" is an attractive (and in a sense, perfectly valid) argument, but it's the same problem with Markdown's different slightly incompatible flavours.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  You have zero loss of data, it's still in a future-proof plaintext file. Changes are mostly trivial. So I wouldn't say it's such a big sin against future-proofing. Improving the design vs. retaining backwards compatibility is a tradeoff.
  - drieddust 10y ago
    Yeah but I don't really understand why projects like org-mode can't provide upgrade path or keep backward compatibility.
    - gkya 10y ago
      They always provide elisp snippets that fix things up after syntax changes.
shoover 10y ago
Ouch. I'm not sure I've ever seen a critical thread about orgmode, so this adds interesting perspective.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
tmalsburg2 10y ago
You are right that the org developers often make changes that break old code, documents, and habits. I was often enough upset about this in the past. But to be fair, they are really trying to make org more powerful and more consistent, and 90% of the changes are necessary for that even though they are painful.

Veen 10y ago

What do you use instead of org mode?

bachmeier 10y ago
For lecture notes/papers/website documents, a system of Pandoc and scripts does all that I need (usually Pandoc is sufficient). For my calendar, first I moved to the system that came with my email, then eventually to a small script I wrote so I could have things the way I like.
- tmalsburg2 10y ago
  Org supports literate programming and that's what makes it so attractive for writing teaching materials. Pandoc only gives me static documents.
noir_lord 10y ago
All though not a direct replacement I use use a program called CherryTree which is amazing, it does all the usual stuff (hierarchical notes) etc, what I really like is you can do everything from the keyboard and it allows you to embed code and stuff as well. Don't be put off by the website the product is much better than the site would imply. http://www.giuspen.com/cherrytree/ http://www.giuspen.com/cherrytree/ One of the things I like is that you can store notes in an SQLite DB and that makes syncing easy via Dropbox, if you pass it the path to the storage file on the CLI it will open that as well so I have it bound to a hotkey combination which lets me quickly open it, edit and close so it stays out the way when I don't need it and is there when I do.
- base698 10y ago
  I have my org directory versioned with git and persisted with gitlab. Accomplishes the same thing.

e40 10y ago

Does it do automatic conversion, so if you had used it continuously it would have just worked? (not a user of org mode, just curious)

NhanH 10y ago
Last time org syntax was changed that affected me, it did not do automatic conversion (it was just last release, actually). In that case, however there was a code snippet to repair them. You have to know and read the changelogs for them though.
bachmeier 10y ago
The one that hit hard was when they changed the exporters (I believe it was the change from 7 to 8). Documentation was limited, but it included gems reminding the reader that it's a lot of work to write documentation, but rest assured that it would eventually happen. Nothing was automated and frankly, I couldn't even figure out a non-automated way to update the files, as I could not find a replacement for some of the functionality I had been using.

plg 10y ago

I have experienced the same thing at least twice in the last 5 years ... automated scripts for compiling and uploading >50 .org files for a course website, suddenly fails. Spend 3 days chasing down why. Small naming change in an org function. Now again? It's very frustrating.

TeMPOraL 10y ago
Happens with every piece of software that is actively developed past initial release. In other words, c'est la vie.
- carterehsmith 10y ago
  Hmmmm wait. I don't see how "every piece of software" is like that. Opening an old Excel or Word file does not randomly fail (last time I checked). Or, if you pick some circa-2005 Java library, it still works. So it is not clear why org-mode gets a free pass here. At least they could prompt you that "your stuff will not work" if you upgrade.
  - TeMPOraL 10y ago
    Excel or Word will randomly fail if the file is old enough. But ok, so Word/Excel can upconvert files if needed. Fair. But does a new document opened in the current Office program look the same? And I mean precisely the same, with fonts and sizes and indentation saved? And what about UI? Don't features appear/disappear? As for Java - it's mostly compatibile in source and in bytecode: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-... like with org-mode, the compatibility is broken in some weird cases. Consider also the file formats. Both Office formats and Java bytecode are binary formats not meant to be read by humans[0]. They can afford backward-compatibility measures. Nobody will bat an eye when new updated version of an opcode will get called CALL2, CALL3, CALL_FIXED, etc. Nor will they care if version flags start showing up in document formatting tags. Org-mode, on the other hand, is a thin layer of visual formatting over a plain text file. Except in few cases (links, folding), it doesn't change the visible contents of the file compared to opening it as unformatted text! In org-mode, your text file is your UI. It is meant to be edited by hand. So you can't clutter the file with backward-compatibility measures. Now org-mode provides some elisp scripts to upconvert older documents. They probably don't cover every case, but that's kind of normal - you can't cover everything, and e.g. the cases discussed here today are some pretty advanced / rare ones. Still, it's cheap to manually fix org-mode files - you can just open it and take a look! Try that with Java bytecode or Office formats. You can't - hence the additional effort in ensuring compatibility between versions. -- [0] - Yes, I know new Office format is zipped XML; it's still not meant to be read or modified manually.

cheez 10y ago

Oh that sucks. I hope the maintainers read this thread.

bzg 10y ago
I do read this thread, and I'm very receptive to the "oh-no-please-dont-break-backward-compatibility-again" complaints. The best course of action is (1) to try to find help on the mailing list for new functions to ease the migration to the new syntactic rules (there is one already in the release notes) and (2) to raise your voice on the mailing list and support those who share the same view. I've been a release manager for 9.0, not the real maintainer, so things may have slipped in directions I didn't have time to carefully review. If I manage to get involved again as a real maintainer, I will enforce syntactic stability and backward compatibility as much as possible.
- cheez 10y ago
  Thanks for your contribution. The thing is that if it isn't easy for code contributors to maintain backwards compatibility, they won't.
- leblancfg 10y ago
  Breaking backwards compatibility happens, and I don't see it as too much of a threat to the project. What might be nice is, for every release, to provide a script that would update your org files to the current standard. Maybe such files even exist, but they would need to be closer to the users' hands.
- theophrastus 10y ago
  How about putting together an upgrade tool in the same spirit of python's 2to3 [1]? If not actually a corrective tool it could discover and report likely outmoded constructs. Or even form the basis of a proper org-lint? In anycase, it must be said that many of us simply could not stay organized without efforts like yours, and we're greatly appreciative! (couldn't write a grant without it anymore) [1] https://docs.python.org/2/library/2to3.html https://docs.python.org/2/library/2to3.html

drieddust 10y ago

But doesn't this work against the conception that we should be using Emacs and Org-mode to future proof ourselves.

peterkelly 10y ago
Yes. "But it's just text, so you can access it in any program" is an attractive (and in a sense, perfectly valid) argument, but it's the same problem with Markdown's different slightly incompatible flavours.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
You have zero loss of data, it's still in a future-proof plaintext file. Changes are mostly trivial. So I wouldn't say it's such a big sin against future-proofing. Improving the design vs. retaining backwards compatibility is a tradeoff.
- drieddust 10y ago
  Yeah but I don't really understand why projects like org-mode can't provide upgrade path or keep backward compatibility.
  - gkya 10y ago
    They always provide elisp snippets that fix things up after syntax changes.

shoover 10y ago

Ouch. I'm not sure I've ever seen a critical thread about orgmode, so this adds interesting perspective.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

tmalsburg2 10y ago

You are right that the org developers often make changes that break old code, documents, and habits. I was often enough upset about this in the past. But to be fair, they are really trying to make org more powerful and more consistent, and 90% of the changes are necessary for that even though they are painful.