Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Hello, Don March writes: > Here is a patch with that addition to ORG-NEWS. Applied. Thank you. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou

Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Here is a patch with that addition to ORG-NEWS. From 18d0d67f7f0efd635351056c185b46e2c2a54d5e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Don March Date: Sat, 2 Jul 2016 02:39:58 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] ORG-NEWS: document last "++" repeater change --- etc/ORG-NEWS | 9 + 1 file

Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Don March writes: > No problem. Would you put that in "new features" or "miscellaneous"? I'd say "miscellaneous" since this is a minor change. Regards,

Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Would you mind providing a note about this change in ORG-NEWS? No problem. Would you put that in "new features" or "miscellaneous"?

Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Hello, Don March writes: > You're right about both things. I updated the patch, and also added an > example to the manual. If that's not what you had it mind, let me know > or feel free to edit. Thank you. I used (not (time-less-p (current-time) time)) as suggested

Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Don March writes: >> If you have a task with the following timestamp: >> >> SCHEDULED: <2016-06-19 Sun 21:00 ++1w> >> >> then marking it as DONE at [2016-06-27 at 07:00] should [...] > ISYM [2016-06-26 at 07:00]. Yes :)

Re: [O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

Hello, Don March writes: > If you have a task with the following timestamp: > > SCHEDULED: <2016-06-19 Sun 21:00 ++1w> > > then marking it as DONE at [2016-06-27 at 07:00] should (debatably) > result in ISYM [2016-06-26 at 07:00]. > SCHEDULED: <2016-06-26 Sun 21:00

[O] [PATCH] Reschedule "++" repeaters on same day if in future

If you have a task with the following timestamp: SCHEDULED: <2016-06-19 Sun 21:00 ++1w> then marking it as DONE at [2016-06-27 at 07:00] should (debatably) result in SCHEDULED: <2016-06-26 Sun 21:00 ++1w> but instead it becomes SCHEDULED: <2016-07-03 Sun 21:00 ++1w> The attached