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

add some examples #13

Closed
mfrasca opened this issue May 18, 2013 · 4 comments
Closed

add some examples #13

mfrasca opened this issue May 18, 2013 · 4 comments
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@mfrasca
Copy link
Owner

mfrasca commented May 18, 2013

the README could use some cleaning up, and it really needs an "examples" section!!!

@ghost ghost assigned hupili May 18, 2013
@hupili
Copy link
Collaborator

hupili commented Aug 24, 2013

Just found this issue. I did not get notifications. I think the most important example is the one with line-break (already in readme). It's very easy to be overlooked by quick users (I was). Now when I look at the project again, I think the current helpdoc from argparse is good enough. I think the problem is that there are too many same/ similar named projects from Google search, and new users are quickly trying out all of them without reading the arg list.

Some possible improvements:

  • use docopt. We can simply write typical use patterns in the code.
  • make the script executable without installation. It was there for some time. Not sure whether you want to make it behave in this way?
  • Still recommend to make line break the default, :) . If this option is overlooked by the users, the output looks very like a problem of the tool...
  • I see in another post that this tool support markdown and Rst? I haven't tried. Maybe you want to add related examples to make it more obvious.

@mfrasca
Copy link
Owner Author

mfrasca commented Aug 25, 2013

default, line break, no I personally really do not like it... but I agree that it's a personal choice and that "IMMV"...
what do you think of adding a /etc/txt2epub.conf and ~/.txt2epub.conf?
maybe calling it txt2epub-py in order to avoid name clashes with similar scripts?
I would myself set the behaviour as it is now (and forget about it), we could put the default as you suggest, users can choose what they prefer.

about the other possible improvements, would you mind opening separate issues for each of them?
you cold then edit your above comment linking everything together.

@hupili
Copy link
Collaborator

hupili commented Aug 26, 2013

conf may be a useful thing. Daily users like you should have already read the docs so they can configure the defaults they want. Other casual users could get a sensible default that works well on a trial doc.

Changing name may not be a good idea. The current name is a good search term. People will get to it immediately.

@mfrasca
Copy link
Owner Author

mfrasca commented Aug 26, 2013

issue is now split in smaller and more detailed ones.

@mfrasca mfrasca closed this as completed Aug 26, 2013
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants