On 23 July 2011 21:33, Joris Putcuyps
About your first point, I'm aware of that. It would have been nice if .cabal and haddock used markdown, this is very popular, thanks to pandoc. Then generating html, pdf, texinfo, ... would be very easy.
This has been suggested before, e.g. http://haskell.1045720.n5.nabble.com/GSoC-Project-A-Haddock-Pandoc-documenta... ; it just requires someone to implement it (I don't think that GSoC submission was successful).
When you create a package in github you add a short description, probably the same as the synopsis from .cabal. The description from .cabal could still go in the README.
I agree that the README will probably contain more than just a description, it is more like a "man page". Having this also parsed by haddock for the html docs would also make me content.
I think the README is more suitable for a website than Haddock docs; e.g. a README for haskell projects typically has at some point "to get this, do `cabal install <foo>' " which you don't really need for Haddock docs (as you're either already reading them on your machine after they've been installed, or on Haddock in which case a central specification of how to use cabal-install is more appropriate than repeating it multiple times). -- Ivan Lazar Miljenovic Ivan.Miljenovic@gmail.com IvanMiljenovic.wordpress.com