gtg team mailing list archive

[Bryce Harrington <614523@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

There is also potentially room for code sharing.  For instance, if the
liblarch tree code proves to be very powerful, perhaps it could be worth
consideration for inclusion in other tools which similarly manage data
in node-tree structures.  This could help in several ways:  Makes the
various tools behave more consistently; sharing dependencies reduces the
'weight' of having both tools installed at the same time; shares
workload of testing and maintaining these components; etc.

As a second example of potentially sharable code, hamster has a nifty
pycairo-based graphics library for rendering its timelines and such;
we've talked about having similar ui elements in gtg, so having that
code packaged in a sharable form could provide benefits as outlined
above.

-- 
Personal (teamwork?) organizer suite / interoperability standards
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/614523
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Gtg
contributors, which is subscribed to Getting Things GNOME!.

Status in Getting Things GNOME!: New

Bug description:
>From http://www.mail-archive.com/gtg-contributors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/msg00109.html :

"""
Personally, I'm dreaming of a "Personal organizer suite" with stuffs
like gtg, hamster, a calendar and tomboy (or equivalent), everything
working together. (I don't mind seeing the "gtg" brand disappearing from
user sight if needed).
"""

Perhaps the best way to achieve this is to work with particular sibling projects to come up with interoperability standards:

 * Commonality in date formats (i.e. respect 'soon', 'now', etc.)

 * D-BUS API design consistency 

 * Standardized data structures for common data objects (tasks, notes, contacts, ...)

We can consider this particular bug report complete once we have held a session on this topic at a Linux conference that includes at least 3 other sibling projects, and come up with some action items to improve interoperability between organizer tools.