Re: [O] Still Wishing for Snooze

[Bastien]

Hi Michael,

Michael Brand <address@hidden> writes:

>>   SCHEDULED: <2013-02-07 jeu. -2d>
>>
>> The item will not be shown today, but in three days.
>
> For this case I would use:
>
>   SCHEDULED: <2013-02-09 Sat>

AFAIU this would not work for what Andrew wants.  He wants the
scheduled item to be invisible on the 2013-02-07 but to appear on
the 2013-02-07 as it is was scheduled on 2013-02-09.  My change
does this.

> It seems I don’t get the point because when a TODO with repeater
>
>   SCHEDULED: <2013-02-01 Fri +1w -3d>
>
> is set to DONE the delay remains and this way also here I would not
> use a delay but:
>
>   SCHEDULED: <2013-02-04 Mon +1w>
>
> The usefulness of a SCHEDULED delay I see together with a TODO and
> repeater to implement an _exception_ (to simplify: exception just for
> the first date, before the repetitions). For example
>
>   SCHEDULED: <2013-02-01 Fri +1w -3d>
>
> would mean: Usually start working on the entry earliest on the first
> day of the month except [2013-02-01 Fri] when work can not start
> before [2013-02-04 Mon]. It would start to show in the agenda on
> [2013-02-04 Mon], [2013-03-01 Fri], [2013-04-01 Mon], [2013-05-01
> Wed], [2013-06-01 Sat] etc. On let’s say [2013-02-05 Tue] it would be
> set to DONE and would change to:
>
>   SCHEDULED: <2013-03-01 Fri +1w>
>
> Note the automatically removed delay.

Point well taken -- this is now what adding "--2d" does: use a
temporary delay that will not be taken into account for dates later
than the next repeater, and that will be deleted when a repeating
task is marked as done.  Thanks for suggesting this.

I think it still makes sense to keep the default behavior: -1d in
a scheduled items means "inconditionnally add a delay of one day,
even when there is a repeater" -- because perhaps what users want 
is a global delay for the repeated task.  If that's not the case,
--2d is just fine too.

Thanks for your feedback on this!

-- 
 Bastien