On Sun, Jul 13 2014, "W. Trevor King" <wking@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