[PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

* org.el (org-auto-repeat-maybe): Changed org-auto-repeat-maybe, so that switching a repeating todo with a timestamp of the form <… ++…> respects `org-extend-today-until'. --- lisp/org.el | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lisp/org.el b/lisp/org.el index

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

om: Valentin Herrmann Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2023 18:44:49 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit * org.el (org-auto-repeat-maybe): Changed org-auto-repeat-maybe

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

hing like <2023-08-13 2:00 ++8h>? > `org-extend-today-until' should probably be ignored then. > Attachments: 0001-org.el-Respect-org-extend-today-until-in-timestamps-.patch 3.0 KB [Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0] This user a

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

Ihor Radchenko writes: > "Valentin G. J. Herrmann" writes: > >> Ok, so I guess I was stupid in another way :E >> I do in fact have the FSF copyright assignment (Though probably under an >> old email address: herr.valentin.m...@gmail.com). I still included the >> TINYCHANGE comment. The

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

"Valentin G. J. Herrmann" writes: > I've now added org-test-with-time-locale so that the test results are > independent of the running machine. I think it's much cleaner this way > than using .* > ... > +(org-test-with-time-locale "en_US.UTF-8" > + (org-test-at-time "<2014-03-04

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

"Valentin G. J. Herrmann" writes: > Ok, so I guess I was stupid in another way :E > I do in fact have the FSF copyright assignment (Though probably under an > old email address: herr.valentin.m...@gmail.com). I still included the > TINYCHANGE comment. The attached patch should finally work.

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

"Valentin G. J. Herrmann" via "General discussions about Org-mode." writes: > In the attachments is a better version with tests that also addresses > your latest critique. Thanks! > + (setq time > +(save-match-data > +

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

hing like <2023-08-13 2:00 ++8h>? > `org-extend-today-until' should probably be ignored then.From 317ab3f132825af9e5caaf0dc1812df545f0ad5f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Valentin Herrmann Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2023 09:48:42 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestam

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

Ihor Radchenko writes: >> (while (or (= nshift 0) >> - (not (time-less-p nil time))) >> + (not (time-less-p nil (time-add >> time-to-extend time > > And this compares "now" with year 1970. Will always

Re: [PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

Valentin Herrmann via "General discussions about Org-mode." writes: > * org.el (org-auto-repeat-maybe): Changed org-auto-repeat-maybe, so that > switching a repeating todo with a timestamp of the form <… ++…> respects > `org-extend-today-until'. Thanks, this would make sense. However, I have

[PATCH] org.el: Respect org-extend-today-until in timestamps with ++

* org.el (org-auto-repeat-maybe): Changed org-auto-repeat-maybe, so that switching a repeating todo with a timestamp of the form <… ++…> respects `org-extend-today-until'. --- lisp/org.el | 5 +++-- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/lisp/org.el b/lisp/org.el index