Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Handle restructured text (rst) readme files #247

Closed
clbarnes opened this issue Dec 3, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

Handle restructured text (rst) readme files #247

clbarnes opened this issue Dec 3, 2019 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@clbarnes
Copy link
Contributor

clbarnes commented Dec 3, 2019

A lot of python packages use sphinx for documentation, and many of those incorporate the README into the docs page; so many packagers of python projects prefer RST format for the readme. Indeed, the default readme content type for PyPI is RST. Maturin is currently angled more towards rust packages, and so expects a markdown readme, even though it publishes packages to pypi. As such, the long descriptions on pypi are messed up.

Is there any way around this?

@kngwyu kngwyu added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 20, 2020
@funkyfuture
Copy link

Markdown is hard-coded as content-type here. regarding an implementation i wonder whether that field should be mandatory when a description is given, or whether maturin should try to sniff it. i also have doubts whether GFM (or any other) should be the default dialect.

@clbarnes
Copy link
Contributor Author

clbarnes commented Oct 7, 2020

It would be most familiar if it behaved the same as setuptools (assume rst) but realistically the current behaviour should probably remain the default. Markdown flavour could easily be configurable, again defaulting to current behaviour.

@clbarnes
Copy link
Contributor Author

clbarnes commented Oct 8, 2020

Closed by #360

@clbarnes clbarnes closed this as completed Oct 8, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants