Viktor Rosenfeld writes:
>> > I found a "bug" in that the subject variable should be a list
>> > cf. the
>> > KOMA manual. This patch fixes this.
>> >
>> > It's pretty complex for something so simple, and I might be
>> > inclined
>> > to admit to the "put it in a LCO"-file approach might be bett
Hi,
Alan Schmitt wrote:
> Rasmus writes:
>
> > I found a "bug" in that the subject variable should be a list cf. the
> > KOMA manual. This patch fixes this.
> >
> > It's pretty complex for something so simple, and I might be inclined
> > to admit to the "put it in a LCO"-file approach might be
Rasmus writes:
> I found a "bug" in that the subject variable should be a list cf. the
> KOMA manual. This patch fixes this.
>
> It's pretty complex for something so simple, and I might be inclined
> to admit to the "put it in a LCO"-file approach might be better.
I'd really like to have a secon
>> This could be a problematic change. It changes the way :with-subject
>> works. I've added changes to allow the subject style to be choose as
>> a radio list with customize. The reason is that LaTeX becomes unhappy
>> if it is not a supported value. If #+OPTIONS subject:t the default is
>> u
Hello Rasmus,
Rasmus writes:
> This could be a problematic change. It changes the way :with-subject
> works. I've added changes to allow the subject style to be choose as
> a radio list with customize. The reason is that LaTeX becomes unhappy
> if it is not a supported value. If #+OPTIONS sub
This could be a problematic change. It changes the way :with-subject
works. I've added changes to allow the subject style to be choose as
a radio list with customize. The reason is that LaTeX becomes unhappy
if it is not a supported value. If #+OPTIONS subject:t the default is
used. If #+OPTI
