Hi Carsten On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 19:18, Carsten Dominik <carsten.domi...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have now merged this patch,
Thank you. I have still concerns about this, did I somehow miss the answer?: On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 18:22, Michael Brand <michael.ch.br...@gmail.com> wrote: > I wonder how C-c C-c with a prefix (supported are one to three C-u) on > a time stamp in a table field is expected to behave. In my opinion it > should not only adjust the day name but like before also evaluate the > table formula which it does not now. If the user does not expect and > check the missing logs of the table calculation update he might > wrongly assume that it happened and assume that there has been just no > change. Michael
