Re: Extending org-koma-letter.el

[Alan Schmitt <alan.schmitt@polytechnique.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1759 bytes --]

Hello,

Nicolas Goaziou <n.goaziou@gmail.com> writes:

> Anyway, for the record, I'm posting an updated version[1] of the file,
> compatible with latest Org (master branch). It may solve your problem.
>
>
> Regards,
>
> [1] I do not seriously maintain this file. It was a proof of concept.

I had to write yet another letter, so I digged into this and it's now
working well enough for me. I made a few changes to the file (which I
attach):

- fixed bugs to the menu (export to pdf, open pdf), added "export to tex
  file"
- put a default address "no address" instead of a blank line, otherwise
  compilation fails
- moved the lco file input before the preamble, so that one can specify
  some additional information (like packages). (This may be
  questionable, don't hesitate to let me know.)

I now have two questions: a technical one and a non-technical one.

The technical one: I see that org-e-koma extends the latex exporter with
some options:

(org-export-define-derived-backend koma-letter e-latex
  :options-alist
  ((:closing "CLOSING" nil org-koma-letter-closing)
   (:from-address "FROM_ADDRESS" nil org-koma-letter-from-address newline)
...

These options have 3 arguments instead of 4 in the definition of options
in org-e-latex:

  :options-alist ((:date "DATE" nil org-e-latex-date-format t)
		  (:latex-class "LATEX_CLASS" nil org-e-latex-default-class t)
...

Is the missing argument the one that lets EXPORT_OPTIONS specify if some
parts can be omitted for subtree export? Or is it something different?

The non-technical question: I understand this exporter is just a proof
of concept, but it is working quite well for me, and I'm ready to help
tweaking this. If I do further modifications, should I send them to the
list?

Thanks,

Alan


[-- Attachment #2: org-koma-letter.el --]
[-- Type: application/emacs-lisp, Size: 11925 bytes --]