From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Daimrod Subject: Re: [Patch] phone links... Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 02:04:15 +0200 Message-ID: <878v2w9fr4.fsf@tanger.home> References: <515E3938.2030202@sift.info> <20130408103832.GE659@strey.biz> <5162BC78.7010509@sift.info> <20130408140731.GF659@strey.biz> <5162D7BC.3020303@sift.info> <20130409073140.GJ659@strey.biz> <20130414204929.GY659@strey.biz> <87r4iam7zd.fsf@tanger.home> <20130417102847.GC659@strey.biz> <87li8ddx5b.fsf@tanger.home> <20130426124852.GS659@strey.biz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43779) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UiCm3-0000DJ-Ck for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 20:00:52 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UiCm2-0000Bs-E1 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 20:00:51 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-x22d.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c03::22d]:63533) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UiCm2-0000Ba-8E for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 30 May 2013 20:00:50 -0400 Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id p57so785543wes.32 for ; Thu, 30 May 2013 17:00:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130426124852.GS659@strey.biz> (Michael Strey's message of "Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:48:52 +0200") 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 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Michael Strey writes: Hello Michael, While merging a patch (from Feng Shu) I have found a bug in `org-contacts-split-property'. Though the docstring says that OMIT-NULLS is forced to t when SEPARATORS is nil (just like `split-string'), it wasn't the case. I've pushed a fix; could you check on your side that it doesn't break anything in your workflow? Thanks, =2D-=20 Daimrod/Greg --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJRp+j/AAoJEBNzVHcrZRiUPcoQAI2pSnN6lBQK/a8auUA3bVfD oYh9L7TRqmnfQ1LOQ4/JA4uB7PorOmwtFj/qnB6eUXkLwrl6I1NJ7WH8tGIAxKX1 I1RSSeAJ+EGeXNHNdOOgjKJmWFHLIJuZfe2+kYcnwKMiEXEcBYwIAQ6lPsWcmd7c hBG7zQnlnodFrG9aEAkf6Z4RC8rqyhx5bIUQ/HInU9JpCP7Ls7u+K3jYjut20xkS qmDWmi3eZsQxGiRZHaA/pnSsu9J9AMdsZ9gAr+tT0rXzfvVwYzMP/phdj9eF4OtB D1DUrkCyicYBw7upyGZ90d1+Y5/h1t07e2+VuhRBRoeTqWyg5gPvL7Nfsh0ukiwn wZqPtF0vooxl8/zkQ/OW8espzlol2iQoAYVjJsK9yHS3+AT2QZ5cX8rN87YdiO2M q3G55yBgB9F1hIOhO/yy1dc1L7MZNx4hfApkY2a1lDFHtmc/cXaU8VvSTFvt0FYk CFZvjQ+htIHrfaca+KQYCajVAgKFrU9KaWQu4mza97zstqN44M7XWCvGruF0u7lL C/47azsfS4DJIvIoY1ycI6q9ulJbX5vQYOmkvW2dzUaeAWwC3iIThWjMv4aphwre ExHpuImGW8SMHP9PqMkFqwVYZizAoW9JO+rhKW+eZxp6zP0V/xFFMfvWcy6BXbqb ZWi4QPKZyj0oexTuGj7k =HqFD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--