From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Nicolas Goaziou Subject: Re: Ignored in-buffer settings and after-export hook Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2013 21:12:23 +0100 Message-ID: <87bo0xwv6g.fsf@gmail.com> References: <5219F424.5030907@gmail.com> <877gf8k753.fsf@gmail.com> <521B5C9D.8070602@gmail.com> <87ob8hy53z.fsf@gmail.com> <521F1BDF.30909@gmail.com> <87vc0msfxr.fsf@gmail.com> <529D9BE7.3030200@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42124) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnwKL-0005LX-FQ for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2013 15:12:22 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnwKD-0008Ac-1m for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2013 15:12:13 -0500 Received: from mail-wg0-x22f.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c00::22f]:55197) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VnwKC-0008AY-Qf for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2013 15:12:04 -0500 Received: by mail-wg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id n12so12788817wgh.2 for ; Tue, 03 Dec 2013 12:12:04 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <529D9BE7.3030200@gmail.com> (Daniel Gerber's message of "Tue, 03 Dec 2013 09:52:55 +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: Daniel Gerber Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hello, Daniel Gerber writes: > On 24/10/2013 20:05, Nicolas Goaziou wrote: >>>>> I guess I can, but it means re-doing the mapping sources to exported >>>>> file names. >>>> AFAICT, there is only one place where both the source and the output >>>> name are known: in `org-publish-file', right after a file has been >>>> published. >>>> >>>> We may add a hook there. Since, at that time, the current buffer can be >>>> anything, both file names need to be passed as arguments to the hook. >>>> Also, files skipped during the publishing process won't trigger it. >>>> >>>> What do you think? >>> It would be fine! >> It has been a long time, but would you mind testing the following patch? > Yes it works for me. Applied then. Thank you for reporting back. Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou