Re: Re: RFC: Better formatting for long descriptions
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.
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