From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: pinard@iro.umontreal.ca (=?utf-8?Q?Fran=C3=A7ois?= Pinard)
Subject: Re: Bug: Recurring TODO spuriously blocked [7.7]
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:33:22 -0500
Message-ID: <87obvds1b1.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca>
References: <87wra2mpij.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca> <87wra1lmll.fsf@norang.ca>
	<87wra1sj1e.fsf@iro.umontreal.ca> <87k461l2qn.fsf@norang.ca>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:47957)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca>) id 1RaHFG-0000wQ-0L
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:33:26 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca>) id 1RaHFE-0000wr-7v
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:33:25 -0500
Received: from 206-248-137-202.dsl.teksavvy.com ([206.248.137.202]:60706
	helo=mercure.epsilon-ti.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <pinard@iro.umontreal.ca>) id 1RaHFE-0000wU-48
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:33:24 -0500
In-Reply-To: <87k461l2qn.fsf@norang.ca> (Bernt Hansen's message of "Mon, 12
	Dec 2011 19:44:16 -0500")
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: Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org

>>> pinard@iro.umontreal.ca (Fran=C3=A7ois Pinard) writes:
>>>> todo-dependencies should likely never be enforced for repeated
>>>> entries

>> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes:
>>> You can set a NOBLOCKING property to t to skip the dependency check
>>> for repeated tasks.

Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> writes:
> It would be nice if subtasks (that are DONE) get automatically moved
> back to TODO when the parent repeating task is marked DONE (and goes
> back to TODO).  It's just not an itch anyone has scratched yet.  [...]

Bernt, I think I understand your point.  You would prefer leaving the
(currently unspecified) meaning opened for some later thinking and
development.  I will not cruisade for a change, as your suggestion gives
me an usable work around.  I thank you for having shared it.

Fran=C3=A7ois