Carsten Dominik writes:
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 11:06 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
>
>> suvayu ali writes:
>>
>>> Hi Tommy and Eric,
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Eric S Fraga
>>> wrote:
Tommy Kelly writes:
> suvayu ali writes:
>
>> This is nothing org specific. Its
On Jan 23, 2011, at 11:06 AM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
suvayu ali writes:
Hi Tommy and Eric,
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Eric S Fraga
wrote:
Tommy Kelly writes:
suvayu ali writes:
This is nothing org specific. Its how customise works. This is the
reason people are encouraged to _n
suvayu ali writes:
> Hi Tommy and Eric,
>
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
>> Tommy Kelly writes:
>>
>>> suvayu ali writes:
>>>
This is nothing org specific. Its how customise works. This is the
reason people are encouraged to _not_ mix customise with setq. I fo
Hi Tommy and Eric,
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Eric S Fraga wrote:
> Tommy Kelly writes:
>
>> suvayu ali writes:
>>
>>> This is nothing org specific. Its how customise works. This is the
>>> reason people are encouraged to _not_ mix customise with setq. I for
>>> example use customise for
Tommy Kelly writes:
> suvayu ali writes:
>
>> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Tommy Kelly wrote:
>>> I just figured out why, despite having a setq in my .emacs, my
>>> org-agenda-files wasn't what I thought it should be.
>>>
>>> It's because if you modify that variable using C-c [ or C-c ], th
suvayu ali writes:
> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Tommy Kelly wrote:
>> I just figured out why, despite having a setq in my .emacs, my
>> org-agenda-files wasn't what I thought it should be.
>>
>> It's because if you modify that variable using C-c [ or C-c ], then any
>> explicit setq is ren
