From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Stacey Marshall <stacey.marshall@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: org-table-copy-down incrementor
Date: Fri, 30 May 2014 11:37:19 +0100
Message-ID: <582BBA40-6792-475C-8771-C09472C45A62@oracle.com>
References: <26CB62FB-01B3-49F6-A3E2-61FC25825493@oracle.com>
	<87ioq8ym8g.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
	<CALn3zoi5LWVNV__76XcTG7dO7oK3CM9758pPfNaY+zzmEmSg6A@mail.gmail.com>
	<87k39gilps.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.2\))
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:38687)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stacey.marshall@oracle.com>) id 1WqKC0-0004XZ-1n
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2014 06:37:51 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <stacey.marshall@oracle.com>) id 1WqKBs-0003Ev-Ms
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 30 May 2014 06:37:44 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87k39gilps.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/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: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Bastien <bzg@gnu.org>
Cc: Org Mode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Hi Bastien,

I'm late to this party I know, but wanted to confirm all is working well =
for me too.

Best regards,

Stacey

On 20 May 2014, at 15:11, Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> wrote:

> Hi Michael,
>=20
> Michael Brand <michael.ch.brand@gmail.com> writes:
>=20
>> For me it would be already enough and preferred when the increment
>> would be the same as in the two fields above point.
>=20
> I pushed a change in master for this -- can you please check it works
> as expected for you?
>=20
> Thanks for this suggestion!  (A lot easier than other routes likes
> using a dedicated #+TBLINC line.)
>=20
> Best,
>=20
> --=20
> Bastien