Re: Re: skip entry with inherited tags

[Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com>]

On Jul 13, 2010, at 7:41 PM, Martin Pohlack wrote:

> Hi Carsten,
>
> On 13.07.2010 13:49, Carsten Dominik wrote:
>> Sorry for taking so much time for this.
>> I am still holding the patch because I have an almost unconscious  
>> itch
>> that something is wrong with it.  I cannot say what exactly it is
>> (if anything).  The logic of what needs to be done when in
>> block agendas has some reason.  One of the things I can say already
>> it that with such a local filter, I am afraid that updating the
>> agenda, or modifying the filter might fail or lead to strange  
>> results.
>> This is actually something you might want to work on testing.
>
> Hard to respond to this vague situation :-).
>
> It would be great if you could point me at more specific situations  
> that
> might break or if others could test the patch.  I have been using it  
> for
> more than a month now without problems.

The specific one I meant is if you use r or g to rebuild the agenda,
if you do something like a refile command which does an automatic  
rebuild,
do you get back the view you expected?

Also, if you apply other filter commands, either with "/", or narrowing
the filter with "/", does that give the expected results while you are
in your block agenda?

>
>> I will only be able to study this more closely after the release.
>
> Take your time, I will wait for more details to emerge or feedback  
> from
> other testers.
>
> One more note here: The current situation for block agendas is a bit
> problematic as their limitations are not documented afaik.
>
> Writing custom agendas is not easy in itself.  If things don't work,  
> it
> is really hard to distinguish between driver errors and limitations of
> the block agendas.

Do you have suggestions on how to improve the situation?

- Carsten