From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Andrew J. Korty" <ajk@iu.edu>
Subject: Re: Bug: org-auto-repeat-maybe only updates first timestamp
 [7.01trans]
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:43:01 -0400
Message-ID: <46038.1284727381@iu.edu>
References: <24331.1284476463@iu.edu> <87pqwc4lto.fsf@fastmail.fm>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=46191 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OwaX3-0007kT-7w
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:59:15 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <ajk@iu.edu>) id 1OwaHQ-0005Ql-SR
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:43:06 -0400
Received: from singsing.itso.iu.edu ([149.166.143.49]:41684)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <ajk@iu.edu>)
	id 1OwaHQ-0005QJ-OX
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 08:43:04 -0400
Received: from iu.edu (149-166-143-228.dhcp-in.iupui.edu [149.166.143.228])
	by singsing.itso.iu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 54CEE239242
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Fri, 17 Sep 2010 12:42:34 +0000 (UTC)
In-reply-to: <87pqwc4lto.fsf@fastmail.fm>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

Matt Lundin <mdl@imapmail.org> wrote:

>> If I have multiple timestamps in a TODO item, org-auto-repeat-maybe
>> only advances the first one.  In the following example, I'd like both
>> the SCHEDULED and DEADLINE timestamps to advance when the item is
>> marked DONE, but only the SCHEDULED timestamp advances.
>>
>> * TODO do something by Sunday but not until Friday
>>   SCHEDULED: <2010-09-17 Fri ++1w> DEADLINE: <2010-09-19 Sun ++1w>
> 
> I can confirm this bug, although AFAICT it occurs only when both the
> SCHEDULED and DEADLINE repeating syntax are of the "++" variety.

Agreed -- hadn't noticed that before.

ajk