hello nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou <m...@nicolasgoaziou.fr> writes:
> Hello, > > cesar mena <cesar.m...@gmail.com> writes: > >> as per the documentation for "org-auto-repeat-maybe" only the base date >> of repeating deadline/scheduled time stamps should change. AFAICT the >> patch changes every occurrence of an inactive repeating timestamp that is >> not a comment. > > The base date of a time stamp is the part before the repeater. IOW, > every time stamp with a repeater has a base date, therefore > `org-auto-repeat-maybe' changes them all. I see no problem with the > docstring. the _base date_ is not the pertinent part; the _deadline/scheduled_ aspect is. moreover this should only happen on the headline. from the docstring: |----------- org-auto-repeat-maybe -------------------------------- | Check if the *current headline* contains a repeated time-stamp. | | If yes, set TODO state back to what it was and change the base date | of repeating *deadline/scheduled time stamps to new date* | | ... |----------------------------------------------------------------- thus we should not programmatically modify an arbitrary date in a document just because it has a repeater. specially not one buried 300 lines deep in a :LOGBOOK: drawer. commit af81211fdc contradicts the established documentation. see bernt hansen's email in this thread for another unintended consequence. he can't mark a task that is no longer scheduled as DONE because there is an inactive timestamp in a :LOGBOOK: entry. > I don't think we agree about the immutable part. see below for clarification. > At least, the user who reported the bug solved in > af81211fdc01b64449179bcdb77fb1c8ecb3fb94 didn't agree. but the solution overreaches. again, only repeating deadline/scheduled time stamps should change if they are in the current headline. > Inactive time stamps are not immutable. apologies if i wasn't clear. what should be immutable is a logged, state-change entry. an existing entry should not change because one marks a task as DONE. regards, -cm
