From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) Subject: Re: Should synopsis handle texinfo markup? Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2017 17:14:10 +0100 Message-ID: <877f3q8qlp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <874lyz396q.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48216) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1coBZ2-0008CT-9J for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:14:17 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1coBYz-000403-K8 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Mar 2017 12:14:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <874lyz396q.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Kost's message of "Sat, 11 Mar 2017 22:27:57 +0300") List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: Alex Kost Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Hi Alex, Alex Kost skribis: > Hello, I've noticed that several packages contain "@code" structures in > their synopses, but only 'description' field supports texinfo markup. > For example, look at: > > guix package -s ruby-minitest-bonus-assertions > > So I wonder, should these synopses be adjusted to remove @code things, > or would it be better to make sysnopses support it? Maybe we should support Texinfo in synopses after all. I don=E2=80=99t thi= nk there were good reasons not to do it. Thoughts? Ludo=E2=80=99.