Replies: 8 comments 7 replies
-
|
No, you can't enable Single Bunch Mode for a single bunch. You can
manually close other Bunches, though, with `!Name.bunch`.
…On 19 Mar 2022, at 6:10, ejf071189 wrote:
I haven't found a way via frontmatter or commands to make a given
bunch close all other active bunches on open when not in single bunch
mode. Is this possible?
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#204
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ok that was what I thought. Do you have any recommendation for the quickest way to "close all active bunches". I was thinking of just making a shortcut that filters the bunch folder for .bunch files and for each name, uses the bunch url scheme to close every bunch (can't think of a way to prevent it from running on already closed bunches but hopefully that wouldn't slow things down too much). Other concern might be odd behavior if the bunches close in parallel rather than sequentially (file to file I mean, all of my bunches individually run in sequential mode currently) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
If you're constantly adding and removing Bunches, yeah, a script that
loops through all .bunch files would be the simplest, most maintainable
solution. You might find that using writing it in AppleScript to loop
through the directory and calling `close bunch "bunch name"` (in a `tell
app "Bunch"` block) instead of the URL handler might be more predictable
for sequencing.
If you have a pretty static collection of Bunches, the superior solution
would be to just list them in the Bunch that should close them. This
will do a better job of tracking what apps are open, allow better
sequencing, and will avoid quitting any apps from other Bunches that the
current Bunch is going to open anyway. If this is something you need to
repeat between multiple Bunches, you could make it a snippet and just
maintain the list in one place.
```
!Comms.bunch
!Work.bunch
!Game Time.bunch
```
If you're handy with scripting, you could pretty easily generate this
list automatically and just run the script to update it when needed (or
have it run as a "run before" script in the Bunch, then use a snippet
call to the generated file). You could also use a script variable that
populated itself with the above content at runtime and then executed as
a snippet..., but I'd have to test to see if that worked or not.
All of this said, I can see room for a `(close every Bunch)` command
that would simplify this process. Already have one that quits all apps,
so why not? I could also see modifying the `single bunch mode:` key to
allow a value of `true`, which would cause opening that Bunch to close
other Bunches, regardless of the Single Bunch Mode preference. It's just
that it would then have a different meaning than "single bunch mode:
ignore" which affects how it reacts to other Bunches opening, not how it
opens itself. Might need a different key for that behavior, like `close
other: true` or something. Will have to think about it.
…-Brett
On 19 Mar 2022, at 23:53, ejf071189 wrote:
Ok that was what I thought. Do you have any recommendation for the
quickest way to "close all active bunches". I was thinking of just
making a shortcut that filters the bunch folder for .bunch files and
for each name, uses the bunch url scheme to close every bunch (can't
think of a way to prevent it from running on already closed bunches
but hopefully that wouldn't slow things down too much). Other concern
might be odd behavior if the bunches close in parallel rather than
sequentially (file to file I mean, all of my bunches individually run
in sequential mode currently)
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#204 (reply in thread)
You are receiving this because you commented.
Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Appreciate such a thoughtful response! I'm still fairly early in my bunch design process so the maintained list of bunches to close in a snippet should be a good solution, but I've been thinking about making quite a long list of bunches for different projects. Using variables and interactive prompts should be able to condense the list and make creation of new bunches infrequent enough. Besides the script maintenance side, the attractive thing about "single bunch mode" is that it simplifies context shifting since you don't have to close the current bunch before opening a new one. I'm really drawn to that concept but I also like the flexibility of having "ad hoc bunch modules" that I can open and close on the fly. In a perfect world, I'd be able to set a "bunch group" key that would tie a group of bunches with the same value into a radio button in which only one bunch in the group can be active at any time, and then all ungrouped bunches would be independent check boxes. I'm not sure if that would be harder to implement than the "close all bunches" idea but I think it would be even more powerful in being able to combine the efficiency of single bunch mode with the flexibility of simultaneous bunches. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
It won’t solve that last feature request, but not that you can use tags to open and close groups of bunches.
https://bunchapp.co/docs/bunch-files/tags/
- Brett
…On Mar 20, 2022, 10:32 AM -0500, ejf071189 ***@***.***>, wrote:
Appreciate such a thoughtful response! I'm still fairly early in my bunch design process so the maintained list of bunches to close in a snippet should be a good solution, but I've been thinking about making quite a long list of bunches for different projects, but using variables and interactive prompts should be able to condense the list and make creation of new bunches infrequent enough.
Besides the script maintenance side, the attractive thing about "single bunch mode" is that it simplifies context shifting since you don't have to close the current bunch before opening a new one. I'm really drawn to that concept but I also like the flexibility of having "ad hoc bunch modules" that I can open and close on the fly. In a perfect world, I'd be able to set a "bunch group" key that would tie a group of bunches with the same value into a radio button in which only one bunch in the group can be active at any time, and then all ungrouped bunches would be independent check boxes. I'm not sure if that would be harder to implement than the "close all bunches" idea but I think it would be even more flexible/powerful in being able to combine the efficiency of single bunch mode with the flexibility of simultaneous bunches.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ah I hadn't seen that one; I think that actually gives me all the functionality I'm looking for! The radio/checkbox system would certainly make it more clear to the user, but as my own workaround just prefixing the name with a group or descriptor should work just fine. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think I'm actually impeded by this:
I seem to be gettin getting erratic behavior whenever I close a tag within a like-tagged bunch whether I use !\tag or %!\tag |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yeah, that feature is a bit underdeveloped as I wasn’t sure yet that there was a solid use case for it :). It’s perfect for this kind of application, though (if it works), so I’ll spend some time debugging that this week if I’m able.
- Brett
…On Mar 21, 2022, 8:06 AM -0500, ejf071189 ***@***.***>, wrote:
I think I'm actually impeded by this:
> Be aware that if you call a \tag command from within a Bunch containing that tag, that Bunch will also be affected. Be cautious as results can be unpredictable if Bunches calling Bunches get nested too deeply.
I seem to be gettin getting erratic behavior whenever I close a tag within a like-tagged bunch whether I use !\tag or %!\tag
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I actually realized that (assuming I'm not making a mistake) %! commands don't seem to work at all! My expected behavior was that for a "child.bunch", that |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
One more thing I noticed is that the tags seem to be cascading to bunches that are opened within another bunch. So if you have Bunch2 will show in the app menu as being tagged with tag1, even if it doesn't have it in its own frontmatter. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I think I have both issues solved, will release a beta version today for
testing. I was forgetting entirely to check for the "ignored" when
handling tags.
Bunches launched by another Bunch inherit the parent's frontmatter,
which has its uses, but certain keys get removed and not passed on. I
can't think of a reason you'd want tags to be inherited, so I'm adding
that to the removed keys. It should solve the issue you're seeing, we'll
see if it causes any other issues in the process.
…-Brett
On 22 Mar 2022, at 0:29, ejf071189 wrote:
One more thing I noticed is that the tags seem to be cascading to
bunches that are opened within another bunch. So if you have
```
---
title: Bunch1
tags: tag1
---
Google Chrome
Bunch2.bunch
```
Bunch2 will show in the app menu as being tagged with tag1, even if it
doesn't have it in its own frontmatter.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#204 (reply in thread)
You are receiving this because you commented.
Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ok, I released beta 1.4.8, please test and let me know if it resolves
the tagging issues or not. https://bunchapp.co/download/
…On 22 Mar 2022, at 0:29, ejf071189 wrote:
One more thing I noticed is that the tags seem to be cascading to
bunches that are opened within another bunch. So if you have
```
---
title: Bunch1
tags: tag1
---
Google Chrome
Bunch2.bunch
```
Bunch2 will show in the app menu as being tagged with tag1, even if it
doesn't have it in its own frontmatter.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#204 (reply in thread)
You are receiving this because you commented.
Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The cascading tags and not following the % (ignore) seem fixed. I'm not sure if this was intended to fix the issue of not being able to close tags from a like-tagged bunch, but that appears to still be not working when multiple tagged bunches start with the same closing command (does work when just one bunch in the group has the command). Test config and cases below. Bunch config:no ignores (!)
ignores (%!)
comment out the
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ok that was what I thought. Do you have any recommendation for the quickest
way to "close all active bunches". I was thinking of just making a shortcut
that filters the bunch folder for .bunch files and for each name, uses the
bunch url scheme to close every bunch (can't think of a way to prevent it
from running on already closed bunches but hopefully that wouldn't slow
things down too much).
On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 9:40 AM Brett Terpstra ***@***.***>
wrote:
… No, you can't enable Single Bunch Mode for a single bunch. You can
manually close other Bunches, though, with `!Name.bunch`.
On 19 Mar 2022, at 6:10, ejf071189 wrote:
> I haven't found a way via frontmatter or commands to make a given
> bunch close all other active bunches on open when not in single bunch
> mode. Is this possible?
>
> --
> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
> #204
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>
> Message ID: ***@***.***>
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#204 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADXRKHWMOWNBDX5MTSR6ITVAXRNNANCNFSM5RD4ED5A>
.
Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
<https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
or Android
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
AppleScript is the most effective way to do it. See [list all open
bunches](https://bunchapp.co/docs/integration/applescript/#list-all-bunches)
and [close
bunch](https://bunchapp.co/docs/integration/applescript/#list-all-bunches).
Essentially you would do (not tested, from top of mind):
```
tell application "Bunch"
repeat with _bunch in (list open bunches)
close bunch _bunch
end repeat
end tell
```
…-Brett
On 11 Oct 2022, at 2:08, ejf071189 wrote:
Ok that was what I thought. Do you have any recommendation for the
quickest
way to "close all active bunches". I was thinking of just making a
shortcut
that filters the bunch folder for .bunch files and for each name, uses
the
bunch url scheme to close every bunch (can't think of a way to prevent
it
from running on already closed bunches but hopefully that wouldn't
slow
things down too much).
On Sat, Mar 19, 2022 at 9:40 AM Brett Terpstra ***@***.***>
wrote:
> No, you can't enable Single Bunch Mode for a single bunch. You can
> manually close other Bunches, though, with `!Name.bunch`.
>
> On 19 Mar 2022, at 6:10, ejf071189 wrote:
>
>> I haven't found a way via frontmatter or commands to make a given
>> bunch close all other active bunches on open when not in single
>> bunch
>> mode. Is this possible?
>>
>> --
>> Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
>> #204
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
>>
>> Message ID: ***@***.***>
>
> —
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#204 (comment)>
> ,
> or unsubscribe
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADXRKHWMOWNBDX5MTSR6ITVAXRNNANCNFSM5RD4ED5A>
> .
> Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS
> <https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675>
> or Android
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>
> .
>
> You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
> ***@***.***>
>
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#204 (comment)
You are receiving this because you commented.
Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I haven't found a way via frontmatter or commands to make a given bunch close all other active bunches on open when not in single bunch mode. Is this possible?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions