I'll try to make a PR handling this
Does it have to be required, though? Perhaps the docs should be changed instead.
Yeah, I thought about it as well and came to the conclusion that having a README is a good practice, so there is nothing wrong with poetry enforcing it. Also, since it was required in the docs, I guess that was @sdispater initial intention, so I thought that firstly we can bring repo to this intended state and eventually changed it from there :)
If it's going to be required, I think it should also be added to the pyproject.toml generated by poetry new (and probably poetry init too).
@tadeoos Well, if it's good practice it should be recommended, not _required_.
the pep 345 makes it optional :
https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0345/#description-optional
You guys are right, I made a new PR with docs update.
Thanks!
poetry new creates a new README.rst but doesn't add it to the pyproject.toml. That could be changed as well, right?
(I also think it should default to markdown, but that's arguable)
I think this should be mandatory when you publish (so most of the time when you build a library) but not required when you build an application.
There is not this distinction yet in poetry but that's somathing worth considering in a near future.
Should we close this since #242 got merged in? The "Closes #237" text on there didn't trigger an automatic close here because develop is not the default branch.
@sdispater - FWIW, I think it will be confusing to have people submit PRs against different branches depending on the type of change. If possible, I recommend having one branch to land incoming changes and making it the default branch. That will address issues like the one here.
Most helpful comment
Should we close this since #242 got merged in? The "Closes #237" text on there didn't trigger an automatic close here because
developis not the default branch.@sdispater - FWIW, I think it will be confusing to have people submit PRs against different branches depending on the type of change. If possible, I recommend having one branch to land incoming changes and making it the default branch. That will address issues like the one here.