From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: [PATCH] Selectively archive by timestamp Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2014 15:23:34 +0100 Message-ID: <87y4qb8w7t.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> References: <20140929141641.GA32551@c3po> <20141212203457.GA32482@c3po> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44140) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xznap-0006sf-1h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 09:22:54 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xznah-0004Mh-Pi for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 09:22:46 -0500 Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([2001:4b98:c:538::197]:52787) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Xznah-0004Md-JG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 09:22:39 -0500 Received: from mfilter24-d.gandi.net (mfilter24-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.152]) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 301F541C075 for ; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 15:22:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from relay5-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.197]) by mfilter24-d.gandi.net (mfilter24-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O6l3nj+hOssH for ; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 15:22:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from selenimh (210.139.126.78.rev.sfr.net [78.126.139.210]) (Authenticated sender: mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr) by relay5-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76E9641C04F for ; Sat, 13 Dec 2014 15:22:36 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <20141212203457.GA32482@c3po> (Toby Cubitt's message of "Fri, 12 Dec 2014 20:34:57 +0000") 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 Hello, Toby Cubitt writes: > Did this patch get lost in the noise? Probably. > It's a fairly straightforward one, which simply adds a useful new > archiving function without touching much else. > > Archiving by date seems such an obvious omission from the existing > archiving commands, I wouldn't have thought this patch was too > controversial. (Unless someone doesn't like the choice of keybinding, in > which case by all means change it!) Looks good. Could you send it again so I can apply it? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou