From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ruben Maher Subject: Re: [Feature Request] Let publishing-function decide :output-file and whether publishing is needed Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2015 11:02:18 +0930 Message-ID: <87pp2gaz19.fsf@ayanami.rkm.id.au> References: <87oaj0d43r.fsf@ayanami.rkm.id.au> <87614xacba.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58311) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZSxfV-0007b8-1p for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 21:32:25 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZSxfR-0002rk-U9 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 21:32:25 -0400 Received: from sakura.rkm.id.au ([103.4.18.101]:46662) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZSxfR-0002rU-Ic for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Aug 2015 21:32:21 -0400 Received: from ayanami.rkm.id.au (ppp118-210-104-2.lns20.adl2.internode.on.net [118.210.104.2]) by sakura.rkm.id.au (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 54910621960 for ; Sat, 22 Aug 2015 10:59:41 +0930 (ACST) In-Reply-To: <87614xacba.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of "Sun, 02 Aug 2015 18:24:09 +0200") 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 Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Can't you simply use org-publish-after-publishing-hook to copy the > published file elsewhere? > > Or, if you write your own exporter, do it =C3=A0 la "ox-latex.el", i.e.= , > publish in :base-directory and move it elsewhere with > `org-publish-attachment'? > >> >> I have achieved this using the attached diff, which tells >> `org-export-output-file-name' to respect the property `:output-file' >> in the communications channel. > > This doesn't sound right: if you know the file name beforehand, you > don't need to call `org-export-output-file-name' in the first place. Thanks for taking the time to make suggestions! Unfortunately I have no = longer have time to work on this at the moment (university), but as soon = as I can get back to it I will investigate this option.