On Sun May 8 2011 Leo wrote:
> >> - Another annoyance is that FIELD could only name those in NOTES.
> >> For example:
> >>
> >> (setq bbdb-auto-notes-rules
> >> '(("Organization" (".*" organization "\\&"))))
> >>
> >> does not update the organisation of the record.
> >
> > When I quickly looked through some folders, I did not have the
> > impression that Organization headers were used extensively.
> > In that sense, I am tempted to give this lower priority. But patches
> > are always welcome!
>
> Indeed. I have locally advised bbdb-annotate-notes to support
> organisation header field.
>
> The trouble with supporting the standard BBDB fields is that they may
> accept different types: lists or strings etc.
In principle there is no ambiguityconcerning lists and strings. All
bbdb fields except for names and individual note fields are lists
(and different notes are again forming a list).
For your issue, a cleaner solution might be an optional argument
merge for bbdb-record-set-field. That could make bbdb-annotate-notes
completely obsolete. Do you want to look into this?
Roland
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WhatsUp Gold - Download Free Network Management Software
The most intuitive, comprehensive, and cost-effective network
management toolset available today. Delivers lowest initial
acquisition cost and overall TCO of any competing solution.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/whatsupgold-sd
_______________________________________________
bbdb-info@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bbdb-info
BBDB Home Page: http://bbdb.sourceforge.net/
