[HN Gopher] Neorg - organize your life in Neovim
___________________________________________________________________
Neorg - organize your life in Neovim
Author : Brajeshwar
Score : 85 points
Date : 2024-03-26 15:16 UTC (7 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| ashton314 wrote:
| Are there docs that I can _read_? Seems like several links are
| broken on the README.
| b33j0r wrote:
| Oh the projects we wouldn't share until they were perfect. I'm
| going to give this one some chance. Aren't we all dreaming of
| this? (No offense emacs, love you).
|
| But I do have the same question. Docs. Can we help?
| yjftsjthsd-h wrote:
| Sharing anything is better than sharing nothing, but it is
| worth keeping in mind that how useful other people will find
| it is directly based on how quickly they can figure it out
| and use it.
| cogman10 wrote:
| It's not a terribly young project (~2 years old) so you might
| expect a bit more maturity around the docs.
|
| I installed it prior to this hn post and it works, but is a
| bit hard to discover what you can do with it.
| tinycombinator wrote:
| I tried clicking on "Usage Modules" but it seems like it's not
| in there yet. The documentation seems to be an incomplete item
| on their roadmap: "Develop and ship a Neorg landing page with
| documentation, presumably with docasaurus."
|
| https://github.com/nvim-neorg/neorg/blob/main/ROADMAP.md
| jasonjmcghee wrote:
| This seems like what they have
|
| https://github.com/nvim-neorg/neorg/wiki
| draxil wrote:
| So org-mode for vim I think?
|
| I expect that's nice if you don't like emacs for some strange
| reason :D (and indeed object to setting up evil mode).
|
| My curiosity is dampened by it not really explaining on the wiki
| very well and trying to force me to watch a video.
| Zambyte wrote:
| It seems to be heavily inspired by Org, but not exactly the
| same. I skimmed through the first video (that seems to be the
| only documentation they have?) and at least the hyperlinking
| was different.
| happy-dude wrote:
| nvim-orgmode [1] is also available. Knowledge from emacs orgmode
| should carry over without much issue. I didn't feel like there
| was a need to reinvent the wheel like neorg does when there were
| powerful notetaking solutions available; does anyone have a
| comparison breakdown of features and capabilities?
|
| [1] https://github.com/nvim-orgmode/orgmode
| lawn wrote:
| I started using Neorg for my personal notes, but I found it
| really difficult to adapt to the markup language.
|
| It's silly I know, but I vastly prefer writing in markdown and
| it's relatives than in Neorg (or org mode for that matter).
|
| It was also weird that they chose to be incompatible with org
| mode, ditching all tooling around it in the process.
| fileeditview wrote:
| Same for me. I just use vimwiki with markdown as doc format.
| Works great for me. If you have simple needs I can recommend
| rwdf wrote:
| Same, but I use wiki.vim. Great for daily journalling.
| BeetleB wrote:
| I find the org mode keybindings fairly ergonomic in Emacs,
| which is one reason I prefer org mode. Did they not migrate the
| keybindings to Neorg? Especially the use of Alt-Ret and TAB
| cycling...
| fwip wrote:
| I've been using zk-nvim[0], it works well enough for me and
| uses Markdown.
|
| [0]: https://github.com/zk-org/zk-nvim
| packetlost wrote:
| The fact that the markup language isn't even remotely similar to
| Markdown is a non-starter for me.
| iLemming wrote:
| Even though I use Vim I never used Neorg. I suppose they use
| the same markup as in Org-mode.
|
| Org-mode is far more superior than Markdown. Again, I don't
| know about Neorg, but Org-mode in Emacs supports tons of
| interesting things that don't exist in Markdown, - things like
| "smart" datetime stamps where you can calculate the difference
| between dates, change the date and it would automatically
| adjust the day of week, or pick a date using the calendar UI;
|
| - it supports time clocking - you can for example use pomodoro
| to automatically clock you in and out for each task, and then
| later build a time report, showing you how much time you spent
| on each task;
|
| - priorities and tags; habit tracking and task management;
|
| - tables that you can use like spreadsheets in Excel - can you
| do calculations in your Markdown tables?;
|
| - embedded LaTeX snippets - indispensable if you need formulas
| and stuff;
|
| - exporting to many different formats - e.g., you can easily
| turn your notes into a reveal.js presentation;
|
| And of course code blocks. But not just static code blocks, you
| can run them and see the results. Moreover, you can for
| instance run some curl command, pipe the results into a
| javascript code block, then results of that calculation pipe
| into a python block and finally into some other backend that
| generates a graph.
|
| In addition, there are tons of plugins you can use for example
| to automatically git commit your notes. Or have Zettelkasten
| system like in Roamresearch, Loqseq or Obsidian. You can keep
| your pdf annotations that automatically sync with the book, or
| keep notes to a codebase, where each note correlates to
| specific file, line or function in your code. Or you can manage
| your Anki cards to help you retain information - your notes and
| the anki cards would be the same, you wouldn't have to store
| and maintain the same info in two different places.
|
| So, my suggestion is that before dismissing any tool that
| doesn't look very familiar to you or the majority of your
| peers, maybe first try to understand why some people choose to
| use that tool, even though it seems to contradict more popular
| choice.
| ChilledTonic wrote:
| No, Neorg does not use the same markup as Org-mode. They use
| their own specification that is specifically designed to be
| different from Org-mode spec.
|
| https://raw.githubusercontent.com/nvim-neorg/norg-
| specs/main...
|
| Furthermore, each item you have listed as a benefit to Org-
| mode is in fact capable of being done in Markdown via plugins
| for neovim, and probably other markdown editors, like Loqseq,
| Roamresearch, or Obisidian, much in the same way you speak of
| plugins that interface with .org docs.
|
| https://github.com/wthollingsworth/pomodoro.nvim
|
| https://github.com/Myzel394/easytables.nvim
|
| https://github.com/vimwiki/vimwiki
|
| So, my suggestion is that before dismissing a comment
| regarding a plugin that is unfamiliar to you, is to read its
| spec, and then try to understand why people would be perhaps
| dismissive of that tool, especially when it chooses to
| conflict with existing, more popular choices.
| iLemming wrote:
| > No, Neorg does not use the same markup as Org-mode.
|
| Okay, I admit I assumed that prematurely. I do stand by my
| words though - Org-mode in Emacs is much more capable than
| Markdown in any other editor or a specialized tool I have
| seen. Emacs is not without flaws, and Org-mode also has
| weaknesses. Sometimes Markdown is a better tool for certain
| things, but when strictly comparing capabilities and
| potential, Org-mode would be ahead. Anyone who has used it
| sufficiently would attest to that.
| packetlost wrote:
| All of this is possible in markdown. None of that is specific
| to the text format, it's all in the tooling, of which
| Markdown is _unrivaled_. Sorry, Org is not that popular in
| the grand scheme of things, just with Emacs people.
|
| The problem is neorg is neither Markdown nor Org and I'm not
| bothering to use a one-off format for this one tool.
| iLemming wrote:
| Yes, indeed, many of these individual features I listed,
| are available in other tools. For example:
|
| - Literate programming can be done in Jupyter Notebooks, R
| Markdown, and other computational notebooks.
|
| - Advanced to-do tracking, agenda views, and tagging are
| available in productivity tools like Asana, Trello, and
| Todoist.
|
| - Customizable exports can be done in many document
| preparation systems like LaTeX or pandoc.
|
| - Spreadsheets and calculations are, of course, native to
| Excel and Google Sheets.
|
| However, the real power of org-mode - and what makes it
| stand out - lies in the integration and synergy of all
| these components in one place, inside a powerful text
| editor (Emacs). This tight integration is harder to achieve
| when you're using various separate tools to accomplish the
| same tasks.
|
| It not only makes org-mode a versatile tool for many text-
| related tasks (note-taking, programming, writing papers,
| planning projects, managing to-dos), but also allows these
| tasks to naturally intertwine and interact. For example,
| you could extract to-dos directly from your code comments,
| or include executable code snippets in your project plan.
|
| Moreover, as a component of Emacs, org-mode can tap into
| the vast ecosystem of Emacs plugins and extensions, meaning
| you can further extend its capabilities to suit your
| particular needs.
|
| So, while it's true that many of these individual features
| can be found elsewhere, the unique combination and
| integration offered by org-mode give it a singular and
| valuable position in the tools landscape.
|
| > Markdown is unrivaled.
|
| Respectfully, I disagree. Yes, Markdown is more popular.
| Yet, in the hands of an experienced Emacs user, things that
| are possible to do with Org-mode can sometimes be on
| another level of awesome. You just probably haven't seen
| it.
| eadmund wrote:
| > it's all in the tooling, of which Markdown is
| _unrivaled_.
|
| The tooling for Emacs is unrivaled. Markdown is, honestly,
| pretty cool: it's probably the best thing the John Gruber
| has ever done. I think that it's arguable that Markdown
| will survive everyone now alive on Earth.
|
| But I believe that Emacs will last longer still, because
| Emacs is not a text format but a powerful user-extensible
| environment. As long as general-purpose computers are
| legal, folks will use something recognisable as an Emacs.
| VTimofeenko wrote:
| I gave this project and nvim-orgmode honest tries about a year
| ago but ultimately went back to Emacs even though I only use it
| for org mode and email these days.
|
| There's just too many org-adjacent packages already written in
| elisp. Plus, terminal independent image rendering just works in
| Emacs.
| ChilledTonic wrote:
| I appreciate the idea of having an org-mode equivalent in Vim,
| but man do the docs suck for this project. Lots of broken links,
| very hard to discover how to actually hit the ground running.
|
| I hate this trend of having video explainers before having
| actually functional docs. I have no interest in watching someone
| fumble around a Youtube video when I could alternatively just
| Ctrl+F a docs page and find the information I need.
|
| For anyone interested, there are alternatives that are more
| Markdown compatible. Vimwiki, as an example, is great.
|
| https://github.com/vimwiki/vimwiki
| melodyogonna wrote:
| I thank Neorg for making me learn about Obsidian.
| tmerse wrote:
| There also is obsidian.nvim [1] if you want to mix and match
| obsidian and neovim for using/editing obsidian vaults.
|
| 1: https://github.com/epwalsh/obsidian.nvim
| Ringz wrote:
| I use this combination for months and can recommend it.
| dang wrote:
| Related:
|
| _Neorg - Life Organization Tool Written in Lua for Neovim_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29330805 - Nov 2021 (5
| comments)
|
| _Neorg: Neovim 0.5's answer to modern life organization_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27802153 - July 2021 (72
| comments)
| lilboiluvr69 wrote:
| Anybody know how this compares to org-mode? Specifically in terms
| of a customizable agenda?
| Nijikokun wrote:
| Think Obsidian for neovim
|
| It has it's own language (not markdown) and key bindings
|
| I find it harder to use than markdown with wiki link support
| ShitHNDorksSay wrote:
| "Organize life using terminal tech" - some self-perceived "10x
| developer" tech idiot
| SuperNinKenDo wrote:
| I'd really like to see what the value proposition is over org-
| mode first and foremost. Yes it runs on Neovim (is it exclusive
| to Neovim?), but vim-orgmode is a thing.
|
| From watching the videos, the guy mentions that a problem early
| on was that it was constantly compared to org-mode, which was
| confusing to people not familiar with org-mode, so I guess
| they're trying to get away from that?
|
| I watched a few videos and saw syntax and features almost
| identical to the most basic level of org-mode.
|
| The one feature it seems to have over org is that it uses a C++
| based parser, which might be faster than the mostly elisp parser
| from org-mode? But even that means it relies on features of
| C++14, which isn't included with macOS, so I'm left feeling like
| this is half anti-feature compared to org-mode's highly portable
| parser: If Emacs works, org-mode will work, and Emacs is mostly
| elisp itself, so if the elisp interpreter works, Emacs will work.
|
| If I can run an executable I can run org-mode essentially, but
| this requires I'm allowed to install a whole new compiler on a
| machine before using it.
|
| I think it was Prot that put forward a strong case for building
| an org-mode specification with multiple compatibility levels, so
| that tools for other platforms could say they implement a certain
| subset of its features and syntax using a simple shorthand like
| "Org-Mode Level 3 Compatible". I'd like to see that effort go
| further.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-03-26 23:01 UTC)