SW <sabrewolfy <at> gmail.com> writes: > This > > *** New Year's Day > <2011-01-01 +1y> > > does *not* include the timestamp in the agenda, yes. > > However, timestamps are *not* included in the agenda from other entries which > *do* have timestamps in the headline. > > I've tested with repeating timestamps, timestamps with times, timestamps > repeating with last year as the start date, and I cannot replicate this. I'll > post if I find anything further.
I've tracked down what causes this behaviour -- it's actually a repeating timestamp which is from a year ore more ago (contrary to what I posted above). This: ** <2011-04-17 +1y> Test :holiday: or this: ** <2010-04-17 +1y> Test :holiday: appears in the agenda *with* the <> timestamp included. This: ** <2012-04-17 +1y> Test :holiday: does *not* appear with the <> timestamp included. The difference is the *starting* year. (I have not included the *day* in the timestamp. I excluded it initially with the thought that the day would not be correct for subsequent years. Including it does not affect the problematic behaviour.)
