Nick Dokos <nicholas.do...@hp.com> writes: > Bastien <b...@altern.org> wrote: > >> Hi Nick, >> >> Nick Dokos <nicholas.do...@hp.com> writes: >> >> > Well, the non-interactiveness and the next day are because the four >> > items I marked were the last four items for that date, so after marking >> > them, the cursor happened to be on the date line for the next day, which >> > apparently is taken as an indication that I want things to be >> > rescheduled for that date, no questions asked. Not sure I like this >> > much. >> >> This implementation was to mimick the previous behavior we had with >> `k m' (to mark an entry) then `k s' (to schedule it to the date at >> point with no prompt.) >> >> I don't like having no prompt here too. >> >> I just changed the behavior so that there is *always* a prompt >> with `m m m B s' -- if the cursor is on a date, this date is the >> default time for the prompt, RET will reschedule to this date. >> > > Thanks - this sounds much better. I hope Greg likes it too. > I ran a bunch of things past it and it worked perfectly (imo of course).
Yes, I have updated and the new behavior seems sensible and intuitive. There's a default shown, but if I type anything it's ignored. Thanks for fixing this.
pgpXzhCqj5Ur8.pgp
Description: PGP signature
