From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gustavo Barros Subject: Re: Bug: org-refile-get-target offers default candidate in duplicity [9.2.6 (9.2.6-4-ge30905-elpaplus @ /home/gustavo/.emacs.d/elpa/org-plus-contrib-20191007/)] Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 19:53:06 -0300 Message-ID: <877e0qw14d.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87lftw1k2n.fsf@gmail.com> <875zgb7520.fsf@gnu.org> <87sgjfgsoy.fsf@gmail.com> <87a75nexqy.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42863) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1j2NM9-0008Jw-Sm for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:53:15 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1j2NM7-0006x8-OG for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 13 Feb 2020 17:53:13 -0500 In-reply-to: <87a75nexqy.fsf@gnu.org> 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-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Bastien Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Bastien, On Thu, Feb 13 2020, Bastien wrote: >> I tested it and indeed the duplicate candidate is gone. However, the >> last refile target no longer seems to be offered as the default for a >> subsequent refile operation. Was that intentional? > > Nope, an oversight -- fixed in master. Thank you very much. I've tested it again, and I believe it is working as intended. I observe, however, a difference of behavior between "completing-read-default" and "ivy-completing-read" in the workings of "org-refile-get-location". Namely, with "completing-read-default" the chosen target is stored in "org-refile-history" with a trailing slash (the "extra" part), while with "ivy-completing-read" it is stored without the trailing slash. I have no idea why this is so and also don't know if this stems from Org's end. As far as I can tell, functionality of the feature with respect to this bug report is working as intended: no duplicate candidates, and history is honored. But the difference surprised me and if you think it might be important, I can provide an ECM for it. Otherwise, I think this can well closed as fixed. Once again, thanks a lot for the fix. Best, Gustavo.