[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [O] Still Wishing for Snooze
From: |
Michael Brand |
Subject: |
Re: [O] Still Wishing for Snooze |
Date: |
Tue, 12 Feb 2013 19:09:03 +0100 |
Hi Bastien
On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Bastien <address@hidden> wrote:
> This should be fixed now. Thanks for the clear example and the
> testing.
Thank you for fixing the bugs and mainly for the --2d delay for
repeated SCHEDULED.
To summarize my point of view of this thread: Originally I wanted to
use such a delay primarily for repeated DEADLINE. But as I had to
realize, to me such a delay seems not simple enough to use with
warning periods other than -0d. Maybe I will adapt my usage of
SCHEDULED a bit so that I can use repeated SCHEDULED with the new --2d
delay, instead of my current not delayable repeated DEADLINE with -0d.
Michael
Re: [O] Still Wishing for Snooze, Andrew M. Nuxoll, 2013/02/12