Carsten Dominik <carsten.domi...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 7.5.2011, at 17:20, Bert Burgemeister wrote:
>
>> Matt Lundin <m...@imapmail.org> writes:
>> 
>>> Bert Burgemeister <tre...@googlemail.com> writes:
>>> 
>>>> Just curious, is there anything I should have known that prevented the
>>>> patch submitted in http://article.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.orgmode/39313,
>>> 
>>> Is it still in the bugtracker, or was it rejected?
>> 
>> Yes, and no.
>> 
>>> With your patch, what would happen if there were two or more links in
>>> the headline?
>>> 
>>> * Two links
>>> %%(format "%s" (concat "[[elisp:(info)]" "[Link to info]]"))
>>> http://www.orgmode.org
>>> 
>>> This entry would show up in the agenda as:
>>> 
>>>  org:      [[elisp:(info)][Link to info]]
>>> 
>>> But AFAICT, hitting C-c C-o in the agenda-buffer (even on the elisp
>>> link) would jump immediately to http://www.orgmode.org, bypassing the
>>> opportunity to select the the %%(...) generated link.
>> 
>> That's true and your patch reduces org-mode's LOC, so you win.
>
> Hi Bert,
>
> does this mean
>
> http://patchwork.newartisans.com/patch/681/
>
> is now obsolete?

It doesn't fix any issues I'm aware of, so you could consider it
obsolete.  But on the other hand, it still makes org-agenda-open-link a
bit more robust as it makes the cond try the remaining clauses if the
first one doesn't succeed.

-- 
Bert


Reply via email to