[DISCUSSION] The future of org-mouse.el and org-inlinetask.el (was: [POLL] Should we accept breaking changes to get rid of Org libraries that perform side effects when loading?)

[Ihor Radchenko]

Bastien Guerry <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Also, I'm not sure org-mouse.el has its place in Org's core nowadays.

org-mouse implements mouse bindings + context menus.
Context menu support is something that major modes generally expect to
provide:

24.2.1 Major Mode Conventions
   • Consider adding mode-specific context menus for the mode, to be
     used if and when users activate the ‘context-menu-mode’ (*note
     (emacs)Menu Mouse Clicks::).  To this end, define a mode-specific
     function which builds one or more menus depending on the location
     of the ‘mouse-3’ click in the buffer, and then add that function to
     the buffer-local value of ‘context-menu-functions’.

And better mouse support is getting more important in a view of recent
native Android port of Emacs, where "mouse" is the main mode of
interaction.

I'd say that we should not remove org-mouse.el, but instead load it by
default. Maybe even fully integrating org-mouse.el into other libraries
like org-keys.el and org.el.

>> It changes the very notion of that is a headline - the syntax definition
>> is altered. Very deeply nested headlines may become inlinetasks upon
>> loading org-inlinetask, touching all aspects of Org, not just editing.
>
> Same here, I'd be tempted to deny Org citizenship to inline tasks: it
> always felt like a nice hack for a niche use-case, but a hack anyway.
>
> If it modifies Org syntax in surprising ways, this is another argument
> for removing org-inlinetask.el from Org's core.  Remember: this is not
> to say that inline tasks are forbidden, it's just a message for users
> that inline tasks are something not maintained by Org's core team.

org-inlinetask, if removed, is bound to break unless we maintain
inlinetask support in the core. And it will be a feature regression for
a number of users (for me, at least - I am a big user of inlinetasks
myself).

However, the current way inlinetasks are implemented is definitely not
great. The clash between headings and inlinetask syntax is getting too
much on the way.

May we re-consider inlinetask syntax and come up with an alternative
syntax that does not clash with headings? This will make things a lot
easier to maintain and allow us to gradually deprecate the existing
<infinite *> syntax.

For example, we can define inlinetasks as

*> TODO inlinetask
***> TODO inlinetask
...

*> TODO inlinetask
Inlinetask contents
*> END

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>