From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: Unable to push to org-mobile Date: Sat, 14 Dec 2013 14:50:53 -0500 Message-ID: <87mwk3us82.fsf@gmail.com> References: <13008CFE-91B9-4221-9DBB-96157A4A2FC6@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52052) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrvF2-0005dF-H0 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 14:51:18 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrvEw-0001ea-Et for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 14:51:12 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:59965) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VrvEw-0001eW-8C for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 14:51:06 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VrvEu-0000AD-LB for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 20:51:04 +0100 Received: from pool-98-110-175-184.bstnma.fios.verizon.net ([98.110.175.184]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 20:51:04 +0100 Received: from ndokos by pool-98-110-175-184.bstnma.fios.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 14 Dec 2013 20:51:04 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Dror Atariah writes: > Bingo! Adding this line allowed me to complete org-mobile-push successfully! Amazing. I have three closing questions: > > 1. What made you look into lines #460-464? Now when you pointed, it is > somehow straightforward to check line #470, but there seems to be no > indication regarding the broken code. Well, line 470 uses the variable tags which depends on def-tags which is set at the top of the function from org-tag-alist, but is then munged in the setq starting on line 456 - and the munging done there seemed particularly relevant to the problem you reported. > 2. What's next? I believe this is a bug... How can I report it? Consider it reported - thanks for checking it. I'll push the proposed fix later on today. If it is wrong, we can revert it later, but at least for now it seems to fix the bug. > 3. Finally, in the meanwhile, till the bug-fix is out, what is the > best practice to maintain this patch locally? > See the org FAQ: http://orgmode.org/worg/org-faq.html#keeping-local-changes-current-with-Org-mode-development -- Nick