This started life with the realization that the RPM website Markdown formatter was combining double dashes into an en dash, in the docs. (See, for example, near the end of the second paragraph in the section "[Defining a Macro](https://rpm-software-management.github.io/rpm/manual/macros.html)"): > “–” can be used to separate options from arguments.
It kind of grew from there. The primary commit is the one to add backtick fencing to more literals in the body text, in an attempt to combat the issue mentioned above. It _should_ be successful, leading to a clearer statement: > `--` can be used to separate options from arguments. The others are just cleanup, and I can drop any on request. (I can drop the fencing one, too, of course.) I'm not sure the last commit will work, it depends on the renderer. Currently the website is showing \`\\\` un-fenced, implying that it's interpreting the backslash as an escape on the second backtick. This is **unlike** GitHub Flavored Markdown, which properly shows a literal `\`. My change may or may not fix it. The other possibility is that the source should be `` `\\` ``, but in GFM that becomes `\\`. You can view, comment on, or merge this pull request online at: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2251 -- Commit Summary -- * Docs: macros: Replace all ... with … * Docs: macros: backtick-fence more literals in body * Docs: Macros: Attempt to fix literal backslash -- File Changes -- M docs/manual/macros.md (187) -- Patch Links -- https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2251.patch https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2251.diff -- Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2251 You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2...@github.com>
_______________________________________________ Rpm-maint mailing list Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
