* Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer @ 2019-12-13 21:48 Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-14 5:05 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-18 0:07 ` Samuel Wales 0 siblings, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-13 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Hi, I want to speak about my Emacs bug report 37890 about org-capture. Seems my main point: | I want to capture an APPT with `org-capture'. I the pop-up buffer to | edit the item I move the date to the second line and add text after the | date (personal preference). That loses the final newline in | CAPTURE-todo.org. As a result, the headline of the item following the | item to be inserted gets appended to the last line of the text: | | ** APPT Abc | <2019-10-23 Mi> | text... ** APPT 8:30 Important Appointment | | breaking the whole item. The user should somehow be prevented from that | happening. has been resolved with the latest merge into Emacs master - is that correct? Then I will close that report. The report also included a feature request which I now want to tell here: I often kill the capture buffer instead of hitting C-c C-k. Just by habit. It's wrong and I now it but I guess it happens to others. I guess the capture buffer is just a narrowed indirect buffer copy of the buffer visiting the according org file. Because of this, when you kill the capture buffer, the original buffer reflects the partial and uncomplete entry one tried to add. This may damage your file. But such internals are not known to all, so it would be good if killing the capture buffer, or even just closing the window, would warn the user and offer to undo the partial changes. Or (really better IMHO) consider a different implementation where the original buffer is not modified until the user explicitly confirms the stuff to capture with C-c C-c. TIA, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-13 21:48 Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-14 5:05 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-15 22:31 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-18 0:07 ` Samuel Wales 1 sibling, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Adam Porter @ 2019-12-14 5:05 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > Or (really better IMHO) consider a different implementation where the > original buffer is not modified until the user explicitly confirms the > stuff to capture with C-c C-c. That would be helpful in some ways, but harmful in others. For example, consider a capture that is started while in a meeting, on a phone call, away from one's desk, etc., with some notes in it, clock start time, etc. (You can find examples of this workflow in, e.g. Bernt Hansen's Org config.) If Emacs were interrupted (crash, power failure, reboot, etc), the un-finalized capture would still be present in the auto-save file and could be recovered when restarting Emacs and finding the file again. But if the original buffer were not modified until the capture is finalized, where would the unfinalized data be, and how would it be recovered into the desired capture location? The way Org uses indirect, narrowed buffers for capturing is an elegant use of Emacs features that helps protect user data from accidental loss. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-14 5:05 ` Adam Porter @ 2019-12-15 22:31 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-16 23:00 ` Michael Heerdegen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-15 22:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adam Porter; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes: > Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > > > Or (really better IMHO) consider a different implementation where the > > original buffer is not modified until the user explicitly confirms the > > stuff to capture with C-c C-c. > > That would be helpful in some ways, but harmful in others. For example, > consider a capture that is started while in a meeting, on a phone call, > away from one's desk, etc., with some notes in it, clock start time, > etc. (You can find examples of this workflow in, e.g. Bernt Hansen's > Org config.) If Emacs were interrupted (crash, power failure, reboot, > etc), the un-finalized capture would still be present in the auto-save > file and could be recovered when restarting Emacs and finding the file > again. A legitimate objection. > The way Org uses indirect, narrowed buffers for capturing is an > elegant use of Emacs features that helps protect user data from > accidental loss. Let me rethink from the other side: how could the issue I described (globbered org file) be prevented? If you happen to kill the capture buffer or forget about it, is there any indication left that there is a problem? A modified buffer visiting the org file is left, but as soon as you successfully capture something else Org happily saves both edits to the file. So maybe we could prevent the user from doing something wrong? Maybe like this: - kill-buffer-hook in the capture buffer could be used to prevent the user from killing such a buffer by accident. Or it could be made configurable what to do (e.g. undo the change with or without user prompting, ask for what to do, etc.) - kill-emacs-hook could be used to register a function that warns when any capture buffers are left when Emacs is to be killed. That would make a difference if you have captured more stuff after having forgotten about a former capture buffer. The user would be guided to finish what he would otherwise have forgotten. That would improve security even further without getting in the way in the normal workflow. Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-15 22:31 ` Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-16 23:00 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-17 17:40 ` Adam Porter 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-16 23:00 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adam Porter; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > - kill-buffer-hook in the capture buffer could be used to prevent the > user from killing such a buffer by accident. Or it could be made > configurable what to do (e.g. undo the change with or without user > prompting, ask for what to do, etc.) > > - kill-emacs-hook could be used to register a function that warns when > any capture buffers are left when Emacs is to be killed. That would > make a difference if you have captured more stuff after having > forgotten about a former capture buffer. The user would be guided to > finish what he would otherwise have forgotten. That doesn't seem to be hard to implement: #+begin_src emacs-lisp (add-hook 'org-capture-mode-hook (defun my-org-capture-mode-hook-fun () (add-hook 'kill-buffer-hook (defun my-org-capture-inhibit-accidental-kill () (user-error "Please don't just kill org capture buffers")) nil 'local) (add-hook 'kill-emacs-hook (defun my-org-capture-barf-for-left-capture-buffers () (dolist (b (buffer-list)) (when (with-current-buffer b (bound-and-true-p org-capture-mode)) (user-error "Please care about org capture buffer %s" (buffer-name b)))))))) (add-hook 'org-capture-prepare-finalize-hook (defun my-org-capture-prepare-finalize-hook-fun () (remove-hook 'kill-buffer-hook 'my-org-capture-inhibit-accidental-kill 'local))) #+end_src Would you consider to do something like this by default? BTW, what about my question whether my original bug report can be closed? TIA, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-16 23:00 ` Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-17 17:40 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-17 18:24 ` Michael Heerdegen 0 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Adam Porter @ 2019-12-17 17:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Hi Michael, Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > Would you consider to do something like this by default? I guess you're asking me, since I'm the only other person in this thread--but I'm not an Org maintainer, so my opinion isn't very important. IMO, the hooks are worth considering, however they should be done very, very carefully, because bad things can happen when functions called in kill hooks don't work as expected (e.g. they can make it very difficult to kill a buffer or the Emacs process, especially for an average user). > BTW, what about my question whether my original bug report can be > closed? I haven't seen your bug report. Was there discussion about it previously? Adam ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-17 17:40 ` Adam Porter @ 2019-12-17 18:24 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-17 18:53 ` Adam Porter ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-17 18:24 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adam Porter; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes: > I guess you're asking me, since I'm the only other person in this > thread--but I'm not an Org maintainer, so my opinion isn't very > important. IMO, the hooks are worth considering, however they should be > done very, very carefully, because bad things can happen when functions > called in kill hooks don't work as expected (e.g. they can make it very > difficult to kill a buffer or the Emacs process, especially for an > average user). Yes, all true. I didn't even check if the code I posted breaks any org commands that kill the buffer. So far it's only meant for demonstration (and my personal usage). Will my request be noticed here, or do you think I should report it to some other place? > > BTW, what about my question whether my original bug report can be > > closed? > > I haven't seen your bug report. Was there discussion about it > previously? No, no discussion at all. As I said, it is Emacs bug #37890, this was my issue: | I want to capture an APPT with `org-capture'. I the pop-up buffer to | edit the item I move the date to the second line and add text after the | date (personal preference). That loses the final newline in | CAPTURE-todo.org. As a result, the headline of the item following the | item to be inserted gets appended to the last line of the text: | | ** APPT Abc | <2019-10-23 Mi> | text... ** APPT 8:30 Important Appointment | | breaking the whole item. The user should somehow be prevented from that | happening. It seems it has been resolved, just without noticing my bug report. If you can confirm that the cited issue has been cared about, I'll close it as done. BTW, what is the canonical place to report org-mode bugs? Emacs bug reports are not (takes a long time until someone even notices) -- I thought this list would be good...or is there a better place? @Adam it's ok if you answer, though I'm a bit disappointed that no one else seems to care so far... Thanks, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-17 18:24 ` Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-17 18:53 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-20 0:10 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-18 1:20 ` Kyle Meyer 2019-12-18 2:16 ` Ihor Radchenko 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Adam Porter @ 2019-12-17 18:53 UTC (permalink / raw) To: emacs-orgmode Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes: > >> I guess you're asking me, since I'm the only other person in this >> thread--but I'm not an Org maintainer, so my opinion isn't very >> important. IMO, the hooks are worth considering, however they should >> be done very, very carefully, because bad things can happen when >> functions called in kill hooks don't work as expected (e.g. they can >> make it very difficult to kill a buffer or the Emacs process, >> especially for an average user). > > Yes, all true. I didn't even check if the code I posted breaks any > org commands that kill the buffer. So far it's only meant for > demonstration (and my personal usage). > > Will my request be noticed here, or do you think I should report it to > some other place? I can't speak for what the maintainers are reading. They are active on this list, as you can see, but I doubt they have time to read every message. If you don't get the response you're looking for, you might post the proposal in a separate thread, perhaps prefixed with [RFC] or [PATCH] as appropriate. They're definitely more likely to notice and respond to actual patches, but that's not a requirement; if you ask for specific feedback about a specific idea or code, that usually gets noticed. >> > BTW, what about my question whether my original bug report can be >> > closed? >> >> I haven't seen your bug report. Was there discussion about it >> previously? > > No, no discussion at all. As I said, it is Emacs bug #37890, this was > my issue: > > | I want to capture an APPT with `org-capture'. I the pop-up buffer to > | edit the item I move the date to the second line and add text after the > | date (personal preference). That loses the final newline in > | CAPTURE-todo.org. As a result, the headline of the item following the > | item to be inserted gets appended to the last line of the text: > | > | ** APPT Abc > | <2019-10-23 Mi> > | text... ** APPT 8:30 Important Appointment > | > | breaking the whole item. The user should somehow be prevented from that > | happening. > > It seems it has been resolved, just without noticing my bug report. > If you can confirm that the cited issue has been cared about, I'll > close it as done. I can neither confirm nor deny. ;) I do seem to recall discussion of that issue here recently (the problem, not necessarily your official bug report of it), and maybe seeing that a fix was made. If you search the list archive for this month or November, you should find something--I think that's the right timeframe. You might also search the git log for capture-related commits. Shouldn't be hard to find if there was something. If it helps, none of my capture templates seem to end with newlines, and I don't see anything in the docstring for org-capture-templates that suggests one is required, so I don't think one is. If you're still having the problem, I'd suggest trying to reproduce it in a clean Emacs configuration with the latest version of Org. You may find this script helpful for that: https://github.com/alphapapa/alpha-org/blob/master/emacs-sandbox.sh > BTW, what is the canonical place to report org-mode bugs? Emacs bug > reports are not (takes a long time until someone even notices) -- I > thought this list would be good...or is there a better place? I think this list is a canonical place. Some people do report Org bugs as official bug reports on the Emacs bug tracker. I don't know whether the Org maintainers read them all. Since Org is officially part of Emacs, sometimes the Emacs maintainers Cc this list about such reports. Anyway, here is a fine place. If you're not sure that something is a bug, you might consider mentioning it on https://old.reddit.com/r/orgmode before posting it here, since /r/orgmode has a wider audience. > @Adam it's ok if you answer, though I'm a bit disappointed that no one > else seems to care so far... People do care! But everyone here works on Org in their spare time, and Org is a big project, and things slip through the cracks. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-17 18:53 ` Adam Porter @ 2019-12-20 0:10 ` Michael Heerdegen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-20 0:10 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adam Porter; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes: > People do care! But everyone here works on Org in their spare time, > and Org is a big project, and things slip through the cracks. I didn't meant to criticize anyone (I have the same problem with my own stuff). Anyway, we got some attention now, thanks for your help! Regards, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-17 18:24 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-17 18:53 ` Adam Porter @ 2019-12-18 1:20 ` Kyle Meyer 2019-12-18 2:16 ` Ihor Radchenko 2 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Kyle Meyer @ 2019-12-18 1:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Heerdegen, Adam Porter; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes: [...] >> I haven't seen your bug report. Was there discussion about it >> previously? > > No, no discussion at all. As I said, it is Emacs bug #37890, this was > my issue: > > | I want to capture an APPT with `org-capture'. I the pop-up buffer to > | edit the item I move the date to the second line and add text after the > | date (personal preference). That loses the final newline in > | CAPTURE-todo.org. As a result, the headline of the item following the > | item to be inserted gets appended to the last line of the text: > | > | ** APPT Abc > | <2019-10-23 Mi> > | text... ** APPT 8:30 Important Appointment > | > | breaking the whole item. The user should somehow be prevented from that > | happening. > > It seems it has been resolved, just without noticing my bug report. If > you can confirm that the cited issue has been cared about, I'll close it > as done. This issue was resolved by 0fa8bb4c5 (org-capture: Inserting an entry doesn't break structure, 2018-10-22), which part of the 9.2 release and prompted by <http://lists.gnu.org/r/emacs-orgmode/2018-10/msg00256.html>. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-17 18:24 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-17 18:53 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-18 1:20 ` Kyle Meyer @ 2019-12-18 2:16 ` Ihor Radchenko 2019-12-20 0:40 ` Michael Heerdegen 2 siblings, 1 reply; 14+ messages in thread From: Ihor Radchenko @ 2019-12-18 2:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Heerdegen, Adam Porter; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Dear Michael, > BTW, what is the canonical place to report org-mode bugs? Emacs bug > reports are not (takes a long time until someone even notices) -- I > thought this list would be good...or is there a better place? @Adam > it's ok if you answer, though I'm a bit disappointed that no one else > seems to care so far... You can try M-x org-submit-bug-report ;) Then it becomes clear that you are in the right place already. Best, Ihor Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes: > Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net> writes: > >> I guess you're asking me, since I'm the only other person in this >> thread--but I'm not an Org maintainer, so my opinion isn't very >> important. IMO, the hooks are worth considering, however they should be >> done very, very carefully, because bad things can happen when functions >> called in kill hooks don't work as expected (e.g. they can make it very >> difficult to kill a buffer or the Emacs process, especially for an >> average user). > > Yes, all true. I didn't even check if the code I posted breaks any org > commands that kill the buffer. So far it's only meant for demonstration > (and my personal usage). > > Will my request be noticed here, or do you think I should report it to > some other place? > >> > BTW, what about my question whether my original bug report can be >> > closed? >> >> I haven't seen your bug report. Was there discussion about it >> previously? > > No, no discussion at all. As I said, it is Emacs bug #37890, this was > my issue: > > | I want to capture an APPT with `org-capture'. I the pop-up buffer to > | edit the item I move the date to the second line and add text after the > | date (personal preference). That loses the final newline in > | CAPTURE-todo.org. As a result, the headline of the item following the > | item to be inserted gets appended to the last line of the text: > | > | ** APPT Abc > | <2019-10-23 Mi> > | text... ** APPT 8:30 Important Appointment > | > | breaking the whole item. The user should somehow be prevented from that > | happening. > > It seems it has been resolved, just without noticing my bug report. If > you can confirm that the cited issue has been cared about, I'll close it > as done. > > BTW, what is the canonical place to report org-mode bugs? Emacs bug > reports are not (takes a long time until someone even notices) -- I > thought this list would be good...or is there a better place? @Adam > it's ok if you answer, though I'm a bit disappointed that no one else > seems to care so far... > > > Thanks, > > Michael. > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-18 2:16 ` Ihor Radchenko @ 2019-12-20 0:40 ` Michael Heerdegen 0 siblings, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-20 0:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Ihor Radchenko; +Cc: Adam Porter, emacs-orgmode Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com> writes: > You can try M-x org-submit-bug-report ;) > Then it becomes clear that you are in the right place already. Thanks! I didn't know about this command - actually I had searched for it but didn't find it because I had searched for something named "report-org-bug" (analogue to `report-emacs-bug'). I think this may happen to other org users not following org-mode development as well - so I just used the command to suggest this name as alias. Regards, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-13 21:48 Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-14 5:05 ` Adam Porter @ 2019-12-18 0:07 ` Samuel Wales 2019-12-18 6:17 ` Fraga, Eric 2019-12-20 0:17 ` Michael Heerdegen 1 sibling, 2 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Samuel Wales @ 2019-12-18 0:07 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Michael Heerdegen; +Cc: emacs-orgmode i might be completely off on this, but it seems the problem is that there is a corrupted buffer. in particular, there is a missing newline at the end of the narrowed region in the capture buffer. this causes the next header to join the last line in the captured buffer. i encountered this problem today. i added a task and duplicated it. this caused the corruption. it also screwed up the stars level, but never mind that. so if i'm not completely off, which i might be, it's not so much killing the buffer as the fact that the state is corrupted in the first place. if the state is corrupted by the lack of a newline at the end of the capture buffer, that can be fixed by adding one there. but the user can screw that up by deleting it. if the state is corrupted by the lack of a newline just after the capture buffer, then that can be fixed -- maybe partly -- by adding a newline there. this seems to me to be the right thing to do. i don't think this will create any blank lines. but *if* it does, it is much better to have the computer crash with the only corruption being the addition of a blank line, than to have a header corrupted. i am the designer of the indirect buffer capture idea. i did not implement it, however. the indirect buffer capture mechanism was to be an improvement on remember.el, and replaced it. you might still be able to find remember.el if you prefer the separate file idea. not sure if my brain is working properly right now, but that's the basic idea. <michael_heerdegen@web.de> wrote: > Hi, > > I want to speak about my Emacs bug report 37890 about org-capture. > Seems my main point: > > | I want to capture an APPT with `org-capture'. I the pop-up buffer to > | edit the item I move the date to the second line and add text after the > | date (personal preference). That loses the final newline in > | CAPTURE-todo.org. As a result, the headline of the item following the > | item to be inserted gets appended to the last line of the text: > | > | ** APPT Abc > | <2019-10-23 Mi> > | text... ** APPT 8:30 Important Appointment > | > | breaking the whole item. The user should somehow be prevented from that > | happening. > > has been resolved with the latest merge into Emacs master - is that > correct? Then I will close that report. > > The report also included a feature request which I now want to tell > here: I often kill the capture buffer instead of hitting C-c C-k. Just > by habit. It's wrong and I now it but I guess it happens to others. > > I guess the capture buffer is just a narrowed indirect buffer copy of > the buffer visiting the according org file. Because of this, when you > kill the capture buffer, the original buffer reflects the partial and > uncomplete entry one tried to add. This may damage your file. But such > internals are not known to all, so it would be good if killing the > capture buffer, or even just closing the window, would warn the user and > offer to undo the partial changes. Or (really better IMHO) consider a > different implementation where the original buffer is not modified until > the user explicitly confirms the stuff to capture with C-c C-c. > > TIA, > > Michael. > > -- The Kafka Pandemic What is misopathy? https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com/2013/10/why-some-diseases-are-wronged.html The disease DOES progress. MANY people have died from it. And ANYBODY can get it at any time. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-18 0:07 ` Samuel Wales @ 2019-12-18 6:17 ` Fraga, Eric 2019-12-20 0:17 ` Michael Heerdegen 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Fraga, Eric @ 2019-12-18 6:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Samuel Wales; +Cc: Michael Heerdegen, emacs-orgmode@gnu.org On Tuesday, 17 Dec 2019 at 17:07, Samuel Wales wrote: > i encountered this problem today. i added a task and duplicated it. > this caused the corruption. it also screwed up the stars level, but > never mind that. I've encountered the problem in the past week or two when I was tweaking one of my capture templates. I had to add a \n to the end of the template string to avoid the problem but didn't explore more than that. -- Eric S Fraga via Emacs 27.0.50, Org release_9.3-34-g2eee3c ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
* Re: Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer 2019-12-18 0:07 ` Samuel Wales 2019-12-18 6:17 ` Fraga, Eric @ 2019-12-20 0:17 ` Michael Heerdegen 1 sibling, 0 replies; 14+ messages in thread From: Michael Heerdegen @ 2019-12-20 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Samuel Wales; +Cc: emacs-orgmode Samuel Wales <samologist@gmail.com> writes: > the indirect buffer capture mechanism was to be an improvement on > remember.el, and replaced it. you might still be able to find > remember.el if you prefer the separate file idea. I find it acceptable once it's been made more secure (e.g. by using hooks like I mentioned). But I wonder now why you said there are still problems with final newlines (and you already got a confirmation), while I and other developers say it has been fixed. Do you use the org mode version built in Emacs, and you don't use Emacs master? Thanks, Michael. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 14+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-12-20 0:41 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 14+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-12-13 21:48 Emacs bug 37890; killing capture buffer Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-14 5:05 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-15 22:31 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-16 23:00 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-17 17:40 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-17 18:24 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-17 18:53 ` Adam Porter 2019-12-20 0:10 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-18 1:20 ` Kyle Meyer 2019-12-18 2:16 ` Ihor Radchenko 2019-12-20 0:40 ` Michael Heerdegen 2019-12-18 0:07 ` Samuel Wales 2019-12-18 6:17 ` Fraga, Eric 2019-12-20 0:17 ` Michael Heerdegen
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).