On 2012-04-23, Samuel Wales wrote:
> If the explanation (which I don't know yet) is short, perhaps the
> manual can explain, for similar use cases.
Then again maybe I am the only person who doesn't get why the footnote is there.
I'm guessing something to do with brackets interfering with link
sy
Hi Bastien,
Just wanted to make sure.
Just so you know:
With my settings, I find that if I have:
* Details [2012-04-23 Mon 09:58]
and I do M-x org-store-link, then the resulting link with ID works
when you click on it.
So it works for me, but I guess others with other settings will
Hi Brian,
Brian van den Broek writes:
> I agree that the discouragement of timestamps in headlines should
> remain in the docs.
>
> But I still do think the docs examples should be changed to comply
> with that advice. I tried twice to send a patch, yet failed to do so
> in a manner recognized b
On 23 Apr 2012 12:15, "Bastien" wrote:
>
> Hi Samuel,
>
> Samuel Wales writes:
>
> > On 2012-04-20, John Hendy wrote:
> > I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
> > conflict between the manual's advice not to include timestamps in
> > headlines and some of i
Hi Samuel,
Samuel Wales writes:
> On 2012-04-20, John Hendy wrote:
> I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
> conflict between the manual's advice not to include timestamps in
> headlines and some of its examples where it does just that.
>
> Does this advic
On 2012-04-20, John Hendy wrote:
I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
conflict between the manual's advice not to include timestamps in
headlines and some of its examples where it does just that.
Does this advice apply any more? Perhaps it shoudl be rem
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:18 AM, Brian van den Broek
wrote:
> On 20 April 2012 18:16, John Hendy wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Brian van den Broek
>> wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
>>> conflict between the manual's advic
On 20 April 2012 18:16, John Hendy wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Brian van den Broek
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
>> conflict between the manual's advice not to include timestamps in
>> headlines and some of its examples w
Hi all,
[I wondered why my first post wasn't labelled a patch, and then I saw
that it attached as octet-stream. Investigating, I was surprised to see
that gmail's web interface cannot handle patches as attachments. Sorry
for the dupe, but I thought it best to send again in a way that
patchwor
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Brian van den Broek
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
> conflict between the manual's advice not to include timestamps in
> headlines and some of its examples where it does just that.
>
Can you point to the disc
Hi all,
I've attached a small patch to the documentation that resolves a
conflict between the manual's advice not to include timestamps in
headlines and some of its examples where it does just that.
This is the first time I've ever submitted a formal patch using git to
any project, so I hope I di
11 matches
Mail list logo
