On 3 Jun 2016 4:03 am, "Donald Stufft" wrote:
>
>
>> On Jun 2, 2016, at 9:16 PM, Nick Timkovich
wrote:
>>
>> I can definitely believe there are more important things to do, but some
of us aren't versed in the intricacies of what's up top and don't have the
familiarity to dive in. Us GitHub plebs
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 9:16 PM, Nick Timkovich wrote:
>
> I can definitely believe there are more important things to do, but some of
> us aren't versed in the intricacies of what's up top and don't have the
> familiarity to dive in. Us GitHub plebs are just raring to work on a feature
> we thi
I can definitely believe there are more important things to do, but some of
us aren't versed in the intricacies of what's up top and don't have the
familiarity to dive in. Us GitHub plebs are just raring to work on a
feature we think is within our grasp ;-)
On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 7:35 PM, Nick Cog
On 2 June 2016 at 15:19, Donald Stufft wrote:
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 6:08 PM, Nick Timkovich wrote:
> So yea, we need some sort of standard. It could be as simple as just adding
> a field to the existing metadata specification with something like:
>
> Description-Format: txt|rst|md|whatever
>
> Wit
> On Jun 2, 2016, at 6:08 PM, Nick Timkovich wrote:
>
> When I brought up enabling Markdown previously, I was a bit over-eager and
> started talking implementation before there was any sort of consensus about
> it in principle, so it was a bit of a straw-man.
>
> The previous discussion seeme
When I brought up enabling Markdown previously, I was a bit over-eager and
started talking implementation before there was any sort of consensus about
it in principle, so it was a bit of a straw-man.
The previous discussion seemed to rest with the onus being on the user to
do it themselves, perhap
