Skip to content

Conversation

@roidelapluie
Copy link

Signed-off-by: Julien Pivotto [email protected]

@roidelapluie roidelapluie force-pushed the readme branch 2 times, most recently from b124656 to 52d90cb Compare October 11, 2016 06:23
Signed-off-by: Julien Pivotto <[email protected]>
@jnpkrn
Copy link

jnpkrn commented Oct 12, 2016

The proposed change is quite naive: it doesn't take the build system
(its reliance on file being named exactly README) into account.

As it's not customary to install README.ascii file rather than
README, we might be better off if just a README.ascii symlink was
added pointing to README instead of plain rename. At least, it's
definitely easiest, if I understand correctly the purpose is a proper
rendering of README at GitHub.

Modifications to the file are just cosmetic, so if you feel the new
version follows AsciiDoc spec better, I have nothing against it.

@dmuhamedagic
Copy link

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 07:47:26AM -0700, Jan Pokorný wrote:

The proposed change is quite naive: it doesn't take the build system
(its reliance on file being named exactly README into account).

Right.

As it's not customary to install README.ascii file rather than
README, we might be better off if just a READMEE.ascii symlink was
added pointing to README instead of plain rename.

Good idea.

At least, it's
definitely easiest, if I understand correctly the purpose is a proper
rendering of README at GitHub.

I assume that that is the purpose.

Modifications to the file are just cosmetic, so if you feel the new
version follows AsciiDoc spec better, I have nothing against it.

Hmm, didn't see any modifications, just rename.

@roidelapluie
Copy link
Author

There are modifications Let me clarify this

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants