Re: Re: confused about logging

[Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca>]

Carsten Dominik <carsten.dominik@gmail.com> writes:

> On Apr 13, 2010, at 4:22 AM, Nick Dokos wrote:
>
>> Bernt Hansen <bernt@norang.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Dan Griswold <dgriswol@rochester.rr.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> I have a repeating task, like so:
>>>>
>>>> *** TODO Print copies						     :@PRINT:
>>>>    SCHEDULED: <2010-03-09 Tue ++1w>
>>>>
>>>> I would like to have things set so that when I change the todo
>>>> state,
>>>> and the schedule advances, then there will not be any logging done.
>>>>
>>>> However, with org-log-repeat, org-log-done, and org-log-done-with- 
>>>> time
>>>> all set to nil (indeed, it appears all org-log-X vars are set to
>>>> nil),
>>>> I get a timestamp in a property drawer when I advance the
>>>> schedule, like
>>>> so:
>>>>
>>>> *** TODO Print copies						     :@PRINT:
>>>>    SCHEDULED: <2010-04-13 Tue ++1w>
>>>>    :PROPERTIES:
>>>>    :LAST_REPEAT: [2010-04-12 Mon 20:06]
>>>>    :END:
>>>>
>>>> This happens with an emacs environment started with emacs -q, and
>>>> a file
>>>> that contains only the above entry.
>>>>
>>>> I don't need or want such information recorded. But I don't know
>>>> how to
>>>> stop it, and I don't know where else to look for the responsible
>>>> variable.
>>>>
>>>> Any hints?
>>>
>>> Set the property
>>>
>>>  :LOGGING:  nil
>>>
>>
>> I don't think that works - and I also don't think that there is a
>> way to
>> do what Dan wants, currently.  The code in org.el:org-auto-repeat- 
>> maybe
>> looks like this:
>>
>>    ....
>>    (when repeat
>>      (if (eq org-log-repeat t) (setq org-log-repeat 'state))
>>      (setq to-state (or (org-entry-get nil "REPEAT_TO_STATE")
>> 			 org-todo-repeat-to-state))
>>      (unless (and to-state (member to-state org-todo-keywords-1))
>> 	(setq to-state (if (eq interpret 'type) last-state head)))
>>      (org-todo to-state)
>>      (org-entry-put nil "LAST_REPEAT" (format-time-string
>> 					(org-time-stamp-format t t)))
>>
>>    ....
>>
>> and the LAST_REPEAT property is set unconnditionally. At least, that's
>> how I read it.
>
>
> This is correct.  Should we change this? LAST_REPEAT is used for the
> clock display
> of repeating tasks.

It's not really useful if there is no clocking data for the task -- so
maybe we can skip setting it when no clock data exists?

-Bernt