From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Leo Subject: Re: A nice feature to suggest Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 04:56:03 +0000 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HKSSp-0004Pz-Il for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:55:23 -0500 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HKSSl-0004LA-SY for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:55:23 -0500 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HKSSl-0004L0-Ny for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:55:19 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2] helo=ciao.gmane.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HKSSl-0001Ic-7P for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Feb 2007 23:55:19 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HKSSb-0005fX-Tb for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 05:55:09 +0100 Received: from 155.43.77.222.broad.qz.fj.dynamic.163data.com.cn ([222.77.43.155]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 05:55:09 +0100 Received: from sdl.web by 155.43.77.222.broad.qz.fj.dynamic.163data.com.cn with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 23 Feb 2007 05:55:09 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On 2007-02-18, Carsten Dominik said: > On Feb 11, 2007, at 11:37, Leo wrote: > >> On 2007-02-11, Carsten Dominik said: >> >>> Why don't you "misuse" the ARCHIVE tag for this? You could change >>> the name of the tag to LOCK or something? Or maybe we could have a >>> list of tags that causes this behavior. >> >> For example, if I set "#+ARCHIVE: ::* Archived Tasks" and ARCHIVE tag >> "* Archived Tasks", then future archiving (org-archive-subtree) will >> create another "* Archived Tasks". Is this intended? > > I have fixed this bug for 4.66. Is there then still need for an > additional way to lock entries from unfolding? > > - Carsten Seems nobody else is interesting in this. Let's leave it for a while. -- Leo (GPG Key: 9283AA3F)