On Mon, 27 Apr 2009, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
Given that we agree that that example is just plainly broken no matter
what, why do you consider it as a valid motivation for throwing all
away?
That's not what I intended. My intention is to give guidelines which
might be independent from a library because they can be understood by
developers without any knowledge of markdown, reST or other libs. If
the guideline says: Make sure that your long description is formated
with the following rules to enable postprocessing using Markdown, reST
or others a developer has to read only one document and does not need
to understand a markup language (which is not hard - but subsumming
the features we need in one paragraph is easier and might increase
acceptance).
We cannot always enable a few packages (honestly assuming that
such formatting is uncommon) to block distro-wide improvements. It
seems that having markup-formattable, yet readable, long descriptions
is just behind the corner ... just believe in it a few bits more :-)
Full agreement here. But as I said I'm convinced that if you give
easy guidelines you can even smoothen the edge of the corner. Moreover
this enables in several cases easier lintian checks which are a killer
feature to get rid of broken descriptions.
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
http://fam-tille.de
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
