did you mean to add

debugger

?

Like the heading structure matches the template’s (if I understand templates correctly)

Omg 😭😭😭🤦🤦🤦🤦 auto imports can be brutal sometimes…….. sorry about that

I indeed meant debugger

might need an example here 😅

like if I have a recipe template with ingredients and steps. suppose I make a new recipe note and it’s missing the ingredients heading. Is this philosophically “no longer valid”? I know templates are more as macros/expansions than strict hierarchy

got it. we do plan on adding this check as well as being able to “backfill” new sections that are added to the template. not currently implemented 😅

Question: I was thinking about writing a pod to export and import Task Notes from

TaskWarrior

can I modify a note on export? like adding a FrontMatter field about the

TaskWarrior

UUID to be able to link the two notes together? For the Import I can just set it but export would be the interesting thing.

Yes, that's what the Airtable export pod does too 😄 See here: https://github.com/dendronhq/dendron/blob/master/packages/plugin-core/src/commands/pods/AirtableExportPodCommand.ts#L166:L173

each command that extends the

BaseExportPodCommand

would implement

onExportComplete

which would run for each exported note

Thank you, but only the command? Not the pod itself?

It seems like so from what I see in the codebase as-is. I do know that @User is working on making the V2 Pods more extensible, so I may not be the best person to ask 🙂

Each export pod command has its pod specific code in pods-core. See here for Airtable Pod V2: https://github.com/dendronhq/dendron/blob/master/packages/pods-core/src/v2/pods/export/AirtableExportPodV2.ts#L129

onExportComplete

runs after the export is completed and is the best place to introduce side effects to the note(like adding airtable id to the frontmatter)

logging a bug: yesterday i created a new vault and subsequently tried to open the tree view, and i got error not found. anyways - it was a simple fix, i restarted the dendron workspace and the tree view opened up

Thanks for the report! We have a fix for this bug already, but I don't think it's going to be included in tomorrow's release. It should definitely be out by the release after that.

So it doesn't look like

@dendronhq/engine-test-utils

is published. Is that intentional? I would like to use it for some tests for my pod.

yeah, but mainly because no one has requested access to it at this point and there didn't seem a point publishing it since were the only consumers 😅 but would be a good idea to expose moving forward. for now, you can pull down the main repo and symlink engine-test-utils using

npm link

as a

devDependency

The same probably applies for common-test-utils. Seems like y’all stopped publishing that awhile ago.

Anyone knows a way to visualize Github issues--specifically relationships between issues? Something like https://github.com/markitx/issue-graph ?

maybe not exactly what you're asking for but it is possible to import github issues using github issues pod (creates a separate md file for each issue) which you should then be able to visualize and parse -> https://wiki.dendron.so/notes/2H9FBzagX9wf4b0V0ADGG.html

ah, interesting, thank you!; and I supposed it won't be hard to get valid backlinks with this approach

yeah, we used to track issues this way internally until we switched over to airtable sync

oh, so you can have a graph of links between issues in airtable?

no but it was easier to manage and triage using the spreadsheet view 😅

got it 🙂 anyway, the idea of using Dendron to visualize Dendron Github issues has a nice, recursive feel to it

Would it make sense to include backlinks as part of the hydration process? https://github.com/dendronhq/dendron/blob/4737aa5dda198e51728496a1243f7ad45f2450f0/packages/common-all/src/dnode.ts#L1090 Currently when we do any type of update/renaming, we will lose the backlinks

taking a look

yes, i think so

there is one downside which is the following case: 1. noteA refers to noteB 2. noteB's backlink = noteA 3. Rename noteA to noteC 4. noteB's backlink is still noteA This might be something to consider in a followup task (perhaps as part of backlinks refactor)

can you join in #748936364283920495-talk?