What I'm going to do: Was: RFC: Description text in packages

[James Antill]

On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 16:17 +0000, Richard Hughes wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-12-18 at 10:57 -0500, James Antill wrote:
> > perl-Regexp-Shellish-0.93-4.fc9
> > txt2tags-2.5-4.fc9
> > geeqie-1.0-0.4.alpha1.fc9
> > tinyca2-0.7.5-3.fc7
> > moreutils-0.28-3.fc9
> > alpine-2.00-1.fc9
> > FEDORA-2008-5191
> 
> Cool, that's a much smaller list that I expected. Thanks for looking
> into this.

 That wasn't a canonical list (I'm not sure we can easily generate that
without just having users say XYZ looks wrong), although from my testing
there aren't "many" packages that contain "\n  " which is one of the
problems:

x = yb.pkgSack.returnPackages()
x = filter(lambda x: x.description.find('\n  ') != -1, x)
x = yum.packageSack.packagesNewestByName(x)
# F9, len(x) == 213

...my point was more that although there might not be a lot of them
there _are_ known packages which will fail. So we can't just say
"everything works, and we have new features".

> >  Not quite. For instance:
> > 
> > msg = """\
> > If you follow what x% of other people are doing and do:
> > 
> > * lists
> >  * that
> >  - most
> > - people
> >  +   use
> > 
> > Then it'll just work.
> > """
> > 
> > msg = """\
> > If you follow what y% of other people are doing and do:
> > * lists
> >  * that
> >  - most
> > - people
> >  +   use
> > 
> > Then it'll just fail.
> 
> Ahh, my simple markup parser is a bit more tolerant to this and formats
> the bullets correctly.

 So, it's not markdown then surely? Can you point to some python that
implements your version?

-- 
James Antill <james at fedoraproject.org>
Fedora