Carsten Dominik writes:
> On 7.5.2011, at 17:20, Bert Burgemeister wrote:
>
>> Matt Lundin writes:
>>
>>> Bert Burgemeister writes:
>>>
>>>> Just curious, is there anything I should have known that prevented the
>>>> patch sub
Matt Lundin writes:
> Bert Burgemeister 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.
5f7cea..609edd4 100644
>> --- a/lisp/org-agenda.el
>> +++ b/lisp/org-agenda.el
>> @@ -6879,9 +6879,7 @@ at the text of the entry itself."
>> (org-get-at-bol 'org-marker)))
>> (buffer (and marker (marker-buffer marker)))
>>
Bert Burgemeister writes:
> * Org-agenda.el (org-agenda-open-link): C-c C-o didn't open links
> inserted via the `%%( )' mechanism, affecting usability of
> `%%(org-bbdb-anniversaries).
>
> TINYCHANGE
> ---
>
>
> The bu
* Org-agenda.el (org-agenda-open-link): C-c C-o didn't open links
inserted via the `%%( )' mechanism, affecting usability of
`%%(org-bbdb-anniversaries).
TINYCHANGE
---
The bug was apparently introduced in commit
ba1e90893d128d8004e4cb6763af692c5a6cd677.
--
Bert
lisp/org-agenda.el | 14
