From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nick Dokos Subject: Re: Config best practices? Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:05:23 -0400 Message-ID: <87h9tfyrrg.fsf@pierrot.dokosmarshall.org> References: <87r3sk1q56.fsf@wmi.amu.edu.pl> <86pp843uly.fsf@example.com> <87oannntpg.fsf@wmi.amu.edu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59441) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YZ9jQ-0002qA-Pv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:05:49 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YZ9jN-0002al-JZ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:05:48 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:43864) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YZ9jN-0002aT-D8 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Mar 2015 23:05:45 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YZ9jK-0007xp-7i for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 04:05:42 +0100 Received: from pool-108-7-223-120.bstnma.fios.verizon.net ([108.7.223.120]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 04:05:42 +0100 Received: from ndokos by pool-108-7-223-120.bstnma.fios.verizon.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 21 Mar 2015 04:05:42 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Marcin Borkowski writes: > On 2015-03-20, at 10:07, Sebastien Vauban wrote: > >> Hello Marcin, >> >> Marcin Borkowski wrote: >>> I'm wondering what people do to keep the configuration of their Org >>> files in order. >> >> I'm not sure to correctly grasp your objective. Could you restate it? > > Sure. > > Where do you put things like > > #+OPTIONS: toc:nil > > or > > #+SEQ_TODO: TODO | DONE > > or > > #+LATEX_HEADER: \newcommand{\eps}{\varepsilon} > > ? > >>> I use a dedicated top-level headline, with a COMMENT keyword, but >>> I started to think that a :noexport: tag might be a better idea. >>> >>> Are there any advantages of one over the other, or other approaches >>> altogether? >> >> I can tell you they aren't isomorphic... The noexport tag simply says >> "don't export this subtree". The COMMENT keyword adds "don't run any >> Babel code block in there". > COMMENT also says that the whole subtree is not to be exported according to the doc: (info "(org) Comment lines") Has that changed? > So I guess that – since the lines with options etc. are not exported > anyway – that using a :noexport: tag might be a better idea. Am I right? > >>> The reason I'm asking is that I'm tweaking my org-one-to-many utility >>> so that it propagates the config to all the generated files. >> >> Still not that clear to me. Maybe an ECM would clarify your request? > > As you wish. This is what I usually do. > > * Headline > * Another one > ** Subheadline > * COMMENT Config > #+LATEX_HEADER: \newcommand{\eps}{\varepsilon} > #+SEQ_TODO: TODO | DONE CANCEL > #+OPTIONS: toc:nil > Yes, but why do you do that? What are you trying to accomplish? What does "keeping the configuration in order" mean? I sometimes use a Setup heading marked with COMMENT, so it does not get exported. I never put babel stuff in there so I haven't worried about that, but if Seb is correct that it prevents babel from evaluating things in the subtree, that's a bonus. If you are just trying to (mostly) hide it from view, add an :ARCHIVE: tag to the heading. But most of the time I have them at the top of the file in plain view. -- Nick