[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Re: RFC: Better formatting for long descriptions

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009, martin f krafft wrote:

    What we really should do, instead of clinging to the NIH-behaviour,
    reinventing the wheel, and polishing it over and over again is ditch
    the pseudo-RFC822 format we have and use Yaml instead.

And most probably somebody else will revive the "switch to XML" suggestion.
I know the pros and cons for different formats but I want a solution *now*
and that's the reason why I wrote:

    >   2. Does not break any existing tool
I tend to agree with Martin. Do you have a particular reason making this change urge? At worst, a format for extended descriptions could be usable by Debian 7. I noticed while checking if packages.debian.org rendered the current descriptions decently that acidlab's description is rendered pretty badly, but AFAICS that's just a packages.d.o bug. FWIW, I had never noticed such an issue.
Kind regards


Reply to: