From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Bastien <bzg@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: org-review-schedule
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 13:51:15 +0200
Message-ID: <87d2gdbkr0.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
References: <m2ppke1izt.fsf@polytechnique.org> <877g6leltk.fsf@bzg.ath.cx>
	<m27g6lbmdp.fsf@polytechnique.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33455)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@gmail.com>) id 1WbTnp-0007Aj-Ie
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 07:51:31 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@gmail.com>) id 1WbTnj-0002ui-Su
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 07:51:25 -0400
Received: from mail-wi0-x233.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::233]:52428)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <bastienguerry@gmail.com>) id 1WbTnj-0002ua-M7
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 07:51:19 -0400
Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id z2so375947wiv.0
	for <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>; Sat, 19 Apr 2014 04:51:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <m27g6lbmdp.fsf@polytechnique.org> (Alan Schmitt's message of
	"Sat, 19 Apr 2014 13:16:02 +0200")
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: Alan Schmitt <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>
Cc: emacs-orgmode <emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>

Alan Schmitt <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org> writes:

>> - maybe you can use "naked" timestamps like 2014-04-19 sam.
>>   instead of inactive ones, this way using "[" in the agenda
>>   will not create false positives by inserting entries with
>>   a REVIEW property.
>
> OK. I'm not sure what "[" is supposed to do in the agenda, and I don't
> see how it could interfere.

It includes headlines with an inactive timestamp in the agenda.
So if you have a property :REVIEW_DELAY: [Inactive timestamp] this
headline will be show in the agenda if the timestamp matches.

> (I like inactive time stamps because I can
> easily adjust their dates with C-left and C-right, is it possible to do
> so with naked timestamps?)

Well... no.  Of course you can simply use inactive timestamps and
advice users not to include them in the agenda.

> Yes. But I should think about it more to see where I could take
> this.

Thanks in advance!

-- 
 Bastien