Phil <p...@7d.nz> writes: > The ability to tangle to multiple destinations is a very convenient way > to manage cluster configurations. No, it's more than that: it's an > *awesome* way to deploy and keep clusters configs and repros well > organized. > ... > #+begin_example > #+begin_src elisp :n-tangle "hosts-A&B/tmp" :tangle /x/y :mkdirp t > (org-babel-n-tangle '(4)) > #+end_src > #+end_example > > In the above example the tangled outputs goes to > *hostA:/tmp/x/y* and *hostB:/tmp/x/y* using a default protocol. > > In the absence of *:n-tangle* or when > *org-babel-ntangle-destinations* is nil. > *org-babel-n-tangle* behaves like *org-babel-tangle* > > What do you think ?
This sounds like a logic extension of the existing tangle mechanism. Although, I feel that the semantics is a bit cumbersome. IMHO, a more natural approach would be (1) Introduce :tangle-directory parameter that defines relative directory to be used as tangle target; this directory, if defined, will be used instead of the Org file directory to expand the tangle target; (2) Allow :tangle-directory and :tangle-file to be a list of targets to write. Then, we can modify `org-babel-effective-tangled-filename' to account for :tangle directory and modify `org-babel-tangle' (as you did) to write to multiple targets. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
