Add Click to Readme

[Siecje]

Under What do I need? click should also be listed.

[untitaker]

I vote for removing the whole section, it duplicates information found in setup.py.

[alxngyn]

Is Click needed?
I just installed flask without needing click.

[untitaker]

It will be required for 1.0

[untitaker]

Does anybody object against removing the first sentence of that section and rephrase it to the following:

~ What do I need?

  `pip` or `easy_install` will install the dependencies for you if you do
  `pip install Flask`.  I encourage you to use a virtualenv.  Check the
  docs for complete installation and usage instructions.

[MikeiLL]

pip install Flask did not install click in virtualenvwrapper on OS X

[docapotamus]

@MikeiLL It will be installing 0.10.1 from PyPI not 1.0

[MikeiLL]

very cool.

On Sep 17, 2014, at 12:52 AM, Joe Doherty wrote:

@MikeiLL It will be installing 0.10.1 from PyPI not 1.0

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[brunsgaard]

@untitaker I agree, the information is redundant as it is (and should be) specified in the install_requires in the setup.py.

I have another proposal though, what about reworking/rewriting the whole README. At this point of writing the README seems a bit insufficient for a project of the size of flask. Also I will suggest to change the format to .rst, this way it will be compliant the requirements for sdist's and also offer more readability on github.

I would be glad to start a new issue and come up with a draft to an improvement, what do you guys think about this idea?

[untitaker]

Armin said once the reason he prefers plaintext READMEs is because

• they prevent you from writing READMEs that are not very readable in a text editor
• they prevent you from writing too long READMEs
• .rst is a weird file extension that might be unfamiliar to some packagers or users. "README" alone is more standard.

I can agree with that, but this also makes embedding Travis badges impossible, which i consider important, see https://github.com/pocoo/metaflask/issues/59. For Werkzeug, we still made it a rst file, but nevertheless i don't think any additional content would be accepted.

[brunsgaard]

@untitaker okay, thanks for taking it up though..

[untitaker]

That said, i don't see a reason why the README couldn't be rst. You'll have to negotiate this with Armin directly, he's the one who has a strong opinion on this. (Best reachable through IRC)