https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1981995 --- Comment #7 from Jerry James <loganjerry@xxxxxxxxx> --- (In reply to Karolina Surma from comment #5) > Thanks for your thoughts. I use the same repoquery as Miro and I remember > myself being puzzled by the hidden BRs when attempting to grep over specfile > tarball. Maybe it's worth mentioning in the new guidelines for others who > encounter the issue. I think adding that to the guidelines is a good idea. > I have no desire to force you into using something you dislike and if you > find the alternative with repoquery viable for your workflow, you can always > adjust the spec file later. I will try to set aside time soon to look into migrating all of my packages to the newer ways of doing things. Thank you for being patient with me. > Meanwhile I did the review, package is APPROVED. Thank you! > One surprise for me is the transformation of rst to html. It should be fine > to include docs in rst format. Is it a personal preference? Yes, personal preference. I find rst tiring to read as a human. I prefer the HTMLized version opened in a browser. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to package-review-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
