Achim Gratz writes:
> Nick Dokos writes:
>> After last night's git pull, org-version returns "beta_8.3" which
>> broke the major-version calculation above. I hardwired the org version
>> major number above, but I was wondering if we could agree on some
>> convention/method that will not break in
On 2014-06-26 18:14 Nick Dokos wrote:
> I have some backward-compat code that does this:
>
> (setq major-version (string-to-number (nth 0 (split-string
> (org-version) "[.]"
It does not work in this situation, because "beta_8.3" is not a valid
version string, but "version<" might be interestin
Nick Dokos writes:
> After last night's git pull, org-version returns "beta_8.3" which
> broke the major-version calculation above. I hardwired the org version
> major number above, but I was wondering if we could agree on some
> convention/method that will not break in the future - maybe an
> org
I have some backward-compat code that does this:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
;;(setq major-version (string-to-number (nth 0 (split-string (org-version)
"[.]"
(setq major-version 8)
(if (< major-version 8)
(progn
(require 'org-latex)
...
