From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Convert README.org to plain text README while installing package Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2022 14:15:08 +0000 Message-ID: <875yldanf7.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87leuca7v7.fsf@disroot.org> <87czfopmsd.fsf@gnu.org> <87h74ztshe.fsf@gmx.de> <871qw31ois.fsf@yahoo.com> <8735gj4ceo.fsf@gnu.org> <87ee038ipt.fsf@gmx.de> <87o7z61v59.fsf@gmail.com> <87bkv6t8mb.fsf@posteo.net> <87fskh28vd.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19990"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tim Cross Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 06 16:19:08 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nyDZU-00052K-65 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 06 Jun 2022 16:19:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58090 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nyDZT-0002wl-1Q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 06 Jun 2022 10:19:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45246) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nyDVo-0008Nu-N7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jun 2022 10:15:24 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:33931) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nyDVm-0004VZ-93 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jun 2022 10:15:20 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A27724010A for ; Mon, 6 Jun 2022 16:15:14 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1654524915; bh=E+/Yi/axZDbR5GkHt06W6+h0gbGSC+2E3HlRQa69FbQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:Date:From; b=YSH09Igd5/tpHTBGgMheKU9ls1UdP+mOaDTk9BcBnnuiOcxwMLpfaO6N6eYY+JNwO w/MBxkOuW3JScE67R+iZiD5WMltzvxkH/2kT4BgfTbvI2qdFvvX7HbBGEnVViNilxo uN9pDAUb+NrAkNhrX236s87zoH17e8Ib4gAGRrZ0toO4LnXAuOV9psTTLsnbJ/W78A lJXdInaqVmpGnqGIHO+uZWhbyO7+u14/2xKn6NHZyLRlQYmNxV6n7PT1VtlPoemX8b zTOWN18P2gth+DAa+m+CkSINSD6i2R3Ghs8j6ur3l5TrTD+gy5gix9ti0nLJvj1xmL cm6qZslqbatuQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4LGwVp2TwXz6tmS; Mon, 6 Jun 2022 16:15:14 +0200 (CEST) Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; prefer-encrypt=nopreference; keydata= mDMEYHHqUhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAp3GdmYJ6tm5McweY6dEvIYIiry+Oz9rU4MH6NHWK0Ee0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiQBBMWCAA4FiEEDM2H44ZoPt9Ms0eHtVrAHPRh1FwFAmBx6lICGwMFCwkIBwIGFQoJ CAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQtVrAHPRh1FyTkgEAjlbGPxFchvMbxzAES3r8QLuZgCxeAXunM9gh io0ePtUBALVhh9G6wIoZhl0gUCbQpoN/UJHI08Gm1qDob5zDxnIHuDgEYHHqUhIKKwYBBAGXVQEF AQEHQNcRB+MUimTMqoxxMMUERpOR+Q4b1KgncDZkhrO2ql1tAwEIB4h4BBgWCAAgFiEEDM2H44Zo Pt9Ms0eHtVrAHPRh1FwFAmBx6lICGwwACgkQtVrAHPRh1Fw1JwD/Qo7kvtib8jy7puyWrSv0MeTS g8qIxgoRWJE/KKdkCLEA/jb9b9/g8nnX+UcwHf/4VfKsjExlnND3FrBviXUW6NcB In-Reply-To: <87fskh28vd.fsf@gmail.com> (Tim Cross's message of "Mon, 06 Jun 2022 23:47:58 +1000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:290797 Archived-At: Tim Cross writes: > Philip Kaludercic writes: > >> Tim Cross writes: >> >>> Michael Albinus writes: >>> >>>> >>>> I have no problem if there are structured README.org or README.md files >>>> in parallel. But a README file should be plain text. >>>> >>> >>> I've seen this mentioned multiple times in this thread and it doesn't >>> make sense to me. >>> >>> Org files *are* plain text. This is one of (perhaps the biggest) selling >>> points for org mode. They don't use any form of 'binary' data and can be >>> read just fine in any text editor or just using cat/less/more whatever. >>> They may look a little *ugly*, especially with respect to URLs, but are >>> still quite readable - a lot more readable than other plain text formats >>> such as xml or html or json etc. >> >> I have consult installed, and if I want to read the package summary >> generated by C-h P, I half of the buffer is just Org configuration: >> >> #+title: consult.el - Consulting completing-read >> #+author: Daniel Mendler >> #+language: en >> #+export_file_name: consult.texi >> #+texinfo_dir_category: Emacs misc features >> #+texinfo_dir_title: Consult: (consult). >> #+texinfo_dir_desc: Useful commands built on completing-read. >> >> #+html: GNU >> Emacs> src="https://github.com/minad/corfu/blob/screenshots/emacs.svg?raw=true"/> >> #+html: > alt="GNU ELPA" src="https://elpa.gnu.org/packages/consult.svg"/> >> #+html: > alt="GNU-devel ELPA" >> src="https://elpa.gnu.org/devel/consult.svg"/> >> #+html: MELPA> src="https://melpa.org/packages/consult-badge.svg"/> >> #+html: MELPA >> Stable> src="https://stable.melpa.org/packages/consult-badge.svg"/> >> >> * Introduction >> :properties: >> :description: Why Consult? >> :end: >> #+cindex: introduction >> >> While plain text, it is not what I am interested in at this point. > > and in what seems to be typical in this thread, you have selected an > extreme example to demonstrate your point. This is definitely not a > typical README.org file - at least not from my experience. While true, I don't get why this is a problem. I don't think making the package developers simplify their READMEs would a better solution, since they are also frequently used to generate manuals. As to whether or not the package description should be the same as the manual, is a different question (I am inclined to think the package description should be a brief summary of a few paragraphs at most).