Re: please read: bug when marking tasks done

[Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca>]

Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes:

> dunno best solution.
>
> another option is to comment out repeater intervals like ;.+2d instead
> of .+0d or =[... .+2d]=.
>
> this would also allow you to know what the interval was [currently
> that information is lost].  it would avoid overloading face.  it would
> be under user control for every ts.  it would, however, require
> updating ts regexp.
>
>
> On 1/13/19, Nicolas Goaziou <mail@nicolasgoaziou.fr> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> cesar mena <cesar.mena@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> i'm ok going with the verbatim syntax - rescheduled lines will now look
>>> like (w/o the double quotes?):
>>>
>>>   - Rescheduled from =[2019-02-05 Tue .1m]= on [2018-09-29 Sat 18:50]
>>
>> Thinking about it, another possibility is to add a variable, e.g.,
>> `org-repeat-inactive-timestamps', letting the user choose what to do
>> with inactive time stamps. I think it would default to nil.
>>
>> This would be a more conservative solution; however, this would
>> contradict releases notes for Org 9.2.
>>
>> WDYT?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> --
>> Nicolas Goaziou
>>
>>

I don't have a need for updating any timestamps but the ones in the
SCHEDULED/DEADLINE: entry.  A variable to control behaviour would work
great for me.

Regards,
Bernt