Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.online> writes:
> Aloha Timothy, :waves: > Sorry for the clumsy patch, which I guess would also benefit from an addition > to > the manual, as well? No problem, we all start somewhere :) (and I know I'm still making mistakes) An update to the manual to describe the changed behaviour would be good. If you'd like you could wait till a core maintainer says this looks good before going to that effort, or you could add it in now so it's all in a single patch --- as long as something happens. > Larger question: do we really want to tinker with ob-latex in this way? Or, > should changes like this patch follow a path indicated by Tim Cross and into > their own package, say ob-latex-ex, which might someday replace ob-latex if it > proved useful and stable? I don't think LaTeX support is likely to leave Org any time soon, so at least until a core maintainer tells you otherwise I'd be inclined to proceed with your current patch. If this was a huge/transformational change I may be more uncertain, but this looks fairly simple to me at least. -- Timothy > All the best, > Tom > > Timothy <tecos...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Hi Thomas, >> >> On the surface, this looks reasonable to me :) >> >> Just commenting on some technicalities with the patch itself: >> - In ORG-NEWS it would be good to wrap the content over multiple lines >> instead of having a single 270 char line :) >> - You seem to have an anomalous change to the ob-python :return entry >> - I don't think your patch subject follows the convention for Org, it >> should be: >> "main file/feature: overall change summary" >> so, something like >> "ox-latex: allow for arbitrary float environments" >> rather than >> "LaTeX export: arbitrary float environments" >> >> Thanks for the patch :) >> >> Timothy
