On Sun, Jul 13 2014, "W. Trevor King" <wking at tremily.us> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 13, 2014 at 09:05:41AM +0300, Tomi Ollila wrote: >> I am satisfied with rst-man2any.py, but as being normal picky me I >> wonder whether the command prefix 'rst-' is being too generic >> i.e. is invading that "namespace". If no one else has the same >> feeling (or the feeling is just wrong (or insignificant)) then this >> can be forgotten :D > > For what it's worth, I don't have any ?rst-*? commands on my system. > I do have ?rst2*? commands, and an ?rstpep2html.py?. I'm happy to > rename to whatever, but rst-man2any.py was the best that I could think > of following the texi2any pattern. Well, IMO both the first 'prerst2x.py' (or how was it called) & this rst-man2any.py would be good as those were to be included as is to notmuch -- when there is something else to comment then I often try to suggest some little details in style (and might not always get it right...) But now, as this rst-man2any.py uses argparse -- which is not python 2.6 compatible (and we currently kind of try to keep python 2.6 supported (rhel 6, and compatibles, among other older but relevant distros(*))) Therefore I simply suggest to return back to prerst2x.py -- as other alternatives are just too tedious to do -- unnecessary waste of time. > Cheers, > Trevor (*) although newer-enough zlib is not there -- but again, that one patch of mine should be easy enough to apply... Tomi