off topic, but as a separate change, perhaps the 2 things named priority could have separate names?
On 12/8/20, Kyle Meyer <k...@kyleam.com> wrote: > [ Sorry, all, for the recent string of duplicate messages from me :x ] > > Adam Spiers writes: > >> This offers an easy way to check the internal numeric priority >> used for sorting within the agenda. > > Thanks for the patch. Please include a changelog entry in your commit > message. > >> --- >> doc/org-manual.org | 8 ++++++++ >> lisp/org-agenda.el | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/doc/org-manual.org b/doc/org-manual.org >> index 5a84a6de6..e914af42d 100644 >> --- a/doc/org-manual.org >> +++ b/doc/org-manual.org >> @@ -9891,6 +9891,14 @@ the other commands, point needs to be in the >> desired line. >> Set tags for the current headline. If there is an active region in >> the agenda, change a tag for all headings in the region. >> >> +- {{{kbd(M-\,)}}} (~org-priority-show~) :: >> + >> + #+kindex: M-, >> + #+findex: org-priority-show >> + Show the numeric priority for the current item. This priority is >> + composed of the main priority given with the =[#A]= cookies, and by >> + additional input from the age of a schedules or deadline entry. >> + >> - {{{kbd(\,)}}} (~org-agenda-priority~) :: > > With a C-u, org-agenda-priority calls org-priority-show. So perhaps > instead of adding a new binding, the documentation should be improved. > What do you think? > > -- The Kafka Pandemic Please learn what misopathy is. https://thekafkapandemic.blogspot.com/2013/10/why-some-diseases-are-wronged.html