Xqt added a comment.
In T278046#7121516 <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T278046#7121516>, @atagar wrote: >>> If we don't have existing epytext lint checks then why is reST linting a requirement to proceed with your change? Or did we discard the change for reasons aside from darglint? >> >> rstcheck validates the reSt syntax. It does not validate the content. > > Hi Xqt. Sorry, what I was trying to ask about was why your CR 673836 <https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/pywikibot/core/+/673836/> was discarded. If darglint is problematic then can we simply drop that for now and merge your reSt conversion? > > I have quite a bit of experience with Sphinx so I'd be delighted to help get this conversion across the finish line if I can. Don't see any advantage. Sphinx tags can be used already bot epytext tags can be used to. `@param foo:` is more readable to for developers than `:param:` because it focuses a bit more. On the other hand I prefer **bold** and *italic* in favour of B{bold} and I{italic}. We have the best of two worlds. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T278046 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: Xqt Cc: atagar, jayvdb, Huji, Aklapper, Xqt, pywikibot-bugs-list, Shalomori123, Jyoo1011, JohnsonLee01, SHEKH, Dijkstra, Khutuck, Zkhalido, Urstrulykkr, Viztor, Wenyi, Tbscho, MayS, Mdupont, JJMC89, Dvorapa, Altostratus, Avicennasis, mys_721tx, Masti, Alchimista
_______________________________________________ pywikibot-bugs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
