Michael Brand <michael.ch.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 18:01, Nick Dokos <nicholas.do...@hp.com> wrote:
> > Karl Voit <devn...@karl-voit.at> wrote:
> >> Maybe there is a (to me at least hidden) feature behind the behavior
> >> that org-time-stamp (C-c .) deletes any repeater information when
> >> used to update a date stamp.
>
> Same here with "DEADLINE: <2011-06-25 Sat +1w>"
>
> > AFAIK, org-time-stamp creates a brand-new time stamp: it does not update
> > an existing one. You can update the time stamp by just using ordinary
> > Emacs command ("it's just text"), or you can put the cursor on various
> > parts of the time stamp and do S-up, S-down (bound to org-shiftup and
> > org-shiftdown resp.) to change that part.
>
> If it is a DEADLINE or SCHEDULED you can also use "C-c C-d ." or "C-c
> C-s ." as a workaround to preserve the repeater. Therefore I consider
> loosing the repeater with just "C-c ." on any active timestamp, no
> matter if a DEADLINE, SCHEDULED or not, a bug.
>
I stand corrected: it does sound like a bug.
Nick
