Bastien <b...@altern.org> wrote: > Hello Karl, > > Karl Voit <devn...@karl-voit.at> writes: > > > Sorry when I disagree for one case: > > > > When I change each entry in my test data using «C-c .» and clicking > > on 1st of July ... > > > > ,----[ test data ] > > | <2011-06-28 Tue> > > | <2011-06-28 Tue +1w> > > | <2011-06-28 Tue -1d> > > | <2011-06-28 Tue +1w -1d> > > `---- > > > > ... I end up having this: > > > > ,----[ result ] > > | <2011-07-01 Fri> > > | <2011-07-01 Fri +1w> > > | <2011-07-01 Fri -1d> > > | <2011-07-01 Fri -1d> > > `---- > > > > In the last case, the repeater gets lost :-( > > I cannot reproduce this. >
I can - but after earlier today, I'm not sure I trust my eyes: anybody else? Org-mode version 7.5 (baseline.387.gf9cc.dirty) (the dirty part is because of some Makefile experiments, nothing to do with timestamps). > Note that if you use the warning _before_ the repeater, > then it gets losts: > > <2011-06-28 Tue -1d +1w> That's not the problem - check the "before" state of the third of Karl's examples. > > That because the warning should always be _after_ the repeater: > > See section 8.3.2 "Repeated tasks" in the manual > > "the repeater should come first and the warning period last: > `DEADLINE: <2005-10-01 Sat +1m -3d>'." > Nick
