My first paper has been accepted for publication recently, and I was instructed to send the
.tex source code based on one of the two templates available on the journal website.
This was painful, both in styling as well in practices. For example, I am using
\nameref through and through my paper, but the template did not include that. Seeing how this is part of a reasonable common package I wasn't that worried, but I am still somewhat worried that they will request that I remove that and change all those to hand-written names (perhaps with
\ref instead or so).
But on the other hand, I also use a custom multi-parameter macro based on
xparse (i.e., it has a mandatory argument and an optional one). This part really worries me, that they will request that I edit that one out. It's not a huge hassle, the paper is not that long and I suppose that I could do it in an hour of work.
However I feel that there is a lesson to be learned here.
How do you prepare your preprints?
Do you have a single-file template that you pass from one paper to another, and accumulate new commands and so on (which is a good thing because it allows you to decide to change some things without damaging previously written papers)?
Do you have a multiple-file template passing from one paper to another, again accumulating new commands and so on (which is also good, but can be slightly more painful when preparing a file for publication)?
Do you have a different habit?
I am aware that this question might be slightly off topic, but I am quite familiar with writing LaTeX code (e.g., I go insane with every warning); but I am new to writing papers that make it to publication. Also, I'd love to get some input and suggestion from more experienced people than me.