From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Carsten Dominik <dominik@science.uva.nl>
Subject: Re: Re: Progress logging with org-mode
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2007 12:45:14 +0200
Message-ID: <8cf58fad83b2db703178b52fd619fc51@science.uva.nl>
References: <loom.20070929T004704-153@post.gmane.org>
	<80f759140e2a298fcb4de1f0393987aa@science.uva.nl>
	<loom.20071004T095606-41@post.gmane.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v624)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IdOCh-0004Yl-Ed
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:45:15 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1IdOCc-0004Sm-Ca
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:45:14 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdOCc-0004SQ-6q
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:45:10 -0400
Received: from korteweg.uva.nl ([146.50.98.70])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <dominik@science.uva.nl>) id 1IdOCb-00070r-Ps
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 04 Oct 2007 06:45:10 -0400
In-Reply-To: <loom.20071004T095606-41@post.gmane.org>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-orgmode>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Tom Weissmann <trmsw@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org


On Oct 4, 2007, at 12:08, Tom Weissmann wrote:

> Carsten Dominik <dominik <at> science.uva.nl> writes:
>
>> I cannot reproduce the indentation you are getting - are you
>> re-indenting the lines
>> with TAB or so?
>
> In fact what happens is that any CLOCK below another one that has a 
> note is
> indented more than the CLOCK above it:

The point is that the next clock entry is inserted *before* the 
previous ones,
and in my setting this does not change the indentation of the entries 
that were
already there...

- Carsten