Hey, I'm finally writing another post about things I did on my week off in August!

I use Remember the Milk for my personal todo lists. It's pretty good! I've been using it for years, and I wax and wane in my attention to my tasks, but it's been a good help and I'm glad to have it. I'd be even happier with some changes, but more on that later.

Years ago, I built Ywar, and I still use it. It tracks my habits, when possible, using the APIs of services where I leave footprints. Am I weighing myself? Am I exercising? Am I doing some reading? Am I closing todo items in Remember the Milk? I get a congratulatory push notification when I hit a goal, and I get an email in the morning telling me what I should do today. These notices help keep me paying attention and motivated. One of the reasons this has worked okay — although I'll definitely admit that Ywar has not remained a massive force for productivity of late — is that it's there's not much extra work involved. It looks at what I'm already doing and records whether I did what I wanted. This means I have good "did exercise" feedback when I go for a run, because my running app logs to RunKeeper, but nearly no feedback when I lift weights, because my weightlifting app has no API. Less friction leads to greater success.

So, I wanted to apply this to my interactions with RTM. Its web UI is pretty good, and there's a native macOS app that's pretty good, too. (Its macOS app is just the web UI, but I'll take it!) They're both extra apps, though, and I have complicated feelings about how many distinct apps or tabs I want. I won't try to spell it out here, I'll just say: I wasn't as happy as I could be using their UI.

At work, we have a cool bot that provides a chat interface to some of our internal services. I wanted to do the same thing for RTM, which should have been no big deal, except that the existing Perl client library for RTM, WebService::RTMAgent, is a synchronous, blocking interface, and Synergy is event-driven and async. I looked at making it work with futures, but I didn't really want to. It was built on the XML interface, it uses AUTOLOAD, and I just didn't really like its construction. (I have used it for years, though, and it's never really been a problem. It's just not what I wanted to built on.)

Instead, I built a new client library, CamelMilk, modeled lightly on something we'd built at work recently. You feed it your API key and secret, and it can manage auth tokens for users and call API methods. API calls return futures that, when ready, produce simple objects. Here's how it looks, more or less, in use in the Synergy plugin:

my $rsp_f = $self->rtm_client->api_call('rtm.tasks.add' => { auth_token => $token, timeline => $tl, name => $todo_description, parse => 1, }); $rsp_f->then(sub ($rsp) { unless ($rsp->is_success) { $Logger->log([ "failed to cope with a request to make a task: %s", $rsp->_response, ]); return $event->reply("Something went wrong creating that task, sorry."); } $Logger->log([ "made task: %s", $rsp->_response ]); return $event->reply("Task created!"); })->else(sub (@fail) { $Logger->log(...); })->retain;

Nice! This code is called in response to a user saying todo eat a whole pie ^tomorrow . It returns immediately while the API call happens in the background and it replies when it's all done. I wrote a little command line program to go along with the library for setting up auth tokens and making one-off API calls.

While writing this library, though, I ended up feeling less excited than when I started. It turns out: I don't like the Remember the Milk API. The first problem is timelines. Here's what the API docs say:

Timelines enable the Remember The Milk API to allow certain actions to be undone. The Remember The Milk web application requests a new timeline every time the application is visited — it is up to the API user to determine how often to request a new timeline. Timelines do not expire, but they must always be used. Timelines can be thought of as long-running database transactions within which individual sub-transactions (API method calls) can be reverted. The start of a timeline is a snapshot of the state of a users' contacts, groups, lists and tasks at that point in time. Method calls can be reverted continouously until the start of the timeline is reached.

So, that api_call call above was actually inside another call:

my $tl_f = $self->timeline_for($event->from_user); $tl_f->then(sub ($tl) { my $rsp_f = $self->rtm_client->api_call('rtm.tasks.add' => {…}); ... );

Either we have a timeline id for that user already ready or we go get one, meaning there's either an additional API call or local state management. That timeline id, though, means that you can later undo some methods. Sort of a niche use, but neat, but it complicates all sorts of actions. As long as you're tracking known timelines for undo, why not track transactions on your own so you can compute the inverse transaction and reply them when needed? Then you'd only do that when you might want to undo.

In practice, what I do, and what at least some other clients do, is make a timeline, cache the id, and never, ever think about it unless you call undo which (I predict, sans evidence) almost nobody ever, ever does.

This isn't my real beef, though, it's just a foreshadowing of it. The real beef is that it takes too many HTTP requests to do anything non-trivial. Let's say that I have some paperwork I need to file, so I have a todo for it. I just found out that it's due Friday! I want to set it to priority 1, add the due date, remove the "boring" tag and add the "omg" tag. That will require I call these methods:

rtm.tasks.setDueDate rtm.tasks.setPriority rtm.tasks.removeTags rtm.tasks.setTags

Every one of these is its own HTTP transaction. What happens when you fail partaway through your series of calls? I guess it's time to call undo — possibly more than once, since you may need to undo several transactions.

Here's how it might work in JMAP if JMAP task lists were a standard. You have a task with id 123 and you want to do the updates above. You'd make a single JMAP call:

methodCalls: [ [ "Task/set", { "update": { "123": { "dueDate": "2019-11-08T00:00:00Z", "priority": 1, "tags/boring": false, "tags/omg": true, } }, }, "a", ] ]

Note that the update argument is an object with the id as a key. You can update many tasks at once. Note, too, that Task/set and its arguments are in an array. You can update multiple kinds of things at once. I could create two new lists and all their items like this...

methodCalls: [ [ "TaskList/set", { "create": { "work": { "name": "Work Stuff" }, "home": { "name": "Home Todos" } }, }, "a", ], [ "Task/set", { "create": { "w1": { "name": "Get Hired", "listId": "#work" }, "w2": { "name": "Get Raise", "listId": "#work" }, "h1": { "name": "Take Nap", "listId": "#home" }, } }, "b" ] ]

Working with a protocol like this makes working in an event loop driven system really nice. You have a lot of options, but a simple one is to stick all your updates into one call, then report back all their results to the individual calling futures, with only a single HTTP transaction required.

Turns out, working with JMAP can really spoil you for other APIs.

Anyway, despite the API being a bit of a drag, Remember The Milk remains great, and I continue to get things done by using it. Now I can get more things done by talking to my Slack bot about my agenda, which is great, and if you want, you can go use the code I wrote for it, too. I've had a look at the network inspector while using RTM, and they've clearly got a better protocol for their UI to use. Maybe someday it will be published for mere users like me, too!