adoc, md or both?

Peter Palaga ppalaga at redhat.com
Fri Dec 5 11:00:30 UTC 2014


Yeah, soon = This weekend already :) -- P

 > Dan Allen ‏@mojavelinux  11m11 minutes ago
 > @ppalaga @github This weekend I'll send the change request if all
 > goes as planned.

On 2014-12-05 11:34, Heiko W.Rupp wrote:
>
> https://twitter.com/mojavelinux/status/539667494168829952
>
> So basically .adoc will be a 1st class citizen in GH soon.
>
> => let's use adoc all over.
>
>
>> Am 05.12.2014 um 11:28 schrieb Thomas Segismont <tsegismo at redhat.com>:
>>
>> Le 05/12/2014 11:07, Peter Palaga a écrit :
>>> On 2014-12-05 10:24, Thomas Segismont wrote:
>>>> Le 04/12/2014 21:54, Heiko W.Rupp a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 04.12.2014 um 19:08 schrieb Peter Palaga <ppalaga at redhat.com>:
>>>>>> we have both adoc, and md READMEs in metrics ATM. Is anybody against
>>>>>> preferring adoc and converting all present md files to adoc?
>>>>>
>>>>> No and we should use AsciiDoc(tor) only.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to agree ... :)
>>>>
>>>> But the Github support of Asciidoc is not extensive. I wrote a quite
>>>> long README.adoc file for the netty-collectd project,
>>>
>>> Yeah, as I just checked on GitHub, they still use AsciiDoctor 0.1.4,
>>> which is quite outdated. I'd be OK with tolerating MD till GitHub
>>
>> Thanks, you're so kind :)
>>
>>> upgrades their AsciiDoctor, but anyway: do you see a feature commonly
>>> used in READMEs, that is broken on GitHub now? READMEs tend to be quite
>>> simple, do they not?
>>
>> I like anchors and links to them, that was one of the things totally broken with Github's asciidoc
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rhq-devel mailing list
>> rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
>> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel
>



More information about the rhq-devel mailing list