From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: Cannot reschedule task with repeater Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 18:18:33 +0100 Message-ID: <08CB54C5-C25E-4128-9F36-4319CA9D1BFD@gmail.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NogbL-0006dG-DK for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:18:43 -0500 Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=58958 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NogbJ-0006Yp-1S for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:18:42 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NogbH-0005ks-T7 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:18:40 -0500 Received: from mail-ew0-f216.google.com ([209.85.219.216]:34559) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NogbG-0005ka-1M for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 12:18:38 -0500 Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so228306ewy.8 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:18:36 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Tom Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Mar 8, 2010, at 8:57 AM, Tom wrote: > It's not clear to me in case of a timestamp like this > > <2010-03-08 H 21:30 .+1d> > > why can't the reschedule feature change the date/time part only > and leave the repeater part intact? Why does it have to throw the > error "Cannot reschedule task with repeater"? > > I see no compelling reason for not allowing rescheduling in this case. > Maybe an option could be added which the user could set if he wants > to allow rescheduling even in case of schedules with repeater. Hi Tom, there is no compelling reason except a technical reason. It was kind of hard to make this work because of the way scheduling and deadlining is implemented. When I added the error message, it was because that seemed better than removing the repeater silently. I have now removed this limitation, because, as you say, it really should not be there.D - Carsten