Sorry for only repeating what was said before - I wrote this in
an airplane and was not aware how far this thread had gone. You guys
had it all figured out. I agree that the best solution is to provide
a proper marker in the agenda when something has moved, but only move
it with "r".
It will wo
On Sep 28, 2007, at 3:15, Richard G Riley wrote:
Two questions:
1) When following the instruction from the following link and
rescheduling from the agenda buffer, why do I always get
"Item scheduled for nil" in the message bufffer?
his is just a bug, fixed now for the next version.
2) Wh
Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It doesn't really make sense because as you reschedule its easy to forget
> which ones you already have rescheduled and end up trying to reschedule an
> already rescheduled one. Which is exactly what happened to me. Like other
> operations on the agend
Bastien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> "Egli Christian (KIRO 41)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> I think the reason is the principle of least surprise.
>
> Agreed. That's also why rescheduling should perhaps leave some
> persistent warning in the agenda buffer (as S-left/right does).
> I guess i
"Egli Christian (KIRO 41)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Bastien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> >> 2) What is the reason behind having to manually "refresh" after a
>> >> reschedule in the agenda buf
"Egli Christian (KIRO 41)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I think the reason is the principle of least surprise.
Agreed. That's also why rescheduling should perhaps leave some
persistent warning in the agenda buffer (as S-left/right does).
I guess it would solve the issue Richard was concerned ab
Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> I think the reason is to warn you about the modification without having
>> to save it. Actually reschedule often happens more than once before you
>> need to save the modified buffers, so it makes sense to only save when
>> you're done with all the mo
Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Bastien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >> 2) What is the reason behind having to manually "refresh" after a
> >> reschedule in the agenda buffer, why does it not do it
automatically?
> > I think the rea
Bastien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> 1) When following the instruction from the following link and
>> rescheduling from the agenda buffer, why do I always get
>>
>> "Item scheduled for nil" in the message bufffer?
>
> I think this is a bug.
>
> Try
Richard G Riley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 1) When following the instruction from the following link and
> rescheduling from the agenda buffer, why do I always get
>
> "Item scheduled for nil" in the message bufffer?
I think this is a bug.
Try this patch (also fixing small typos.)
diff -u /h
10 matches
Mail list logo