[email protected] (Trent W. Buck) writes: > Max Battcher <[email protected]> writes: > >> [...] Of course, RFC822 is full of loopholes and surprisingly hard to >> parse in reality [...] I think I have a reasonable suggestion that is >> easier to parse than RFC822, but carries a similar effect: YAML >> formatted darcs comments. > > Can you support this claim? I agree with Trent in disagreeing. RFC822 is infinitely nicer for human readers than YAML, JSON and all the other postmodern plain-text-come-xml formats. This also means that it is the most backwards-compatible option we have, by the virtue of rendering nicely even if it is not rendered at all (i.e. displayed verbatim).
Yours, Petr. _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
