Add link to issue reference for convenience in CONTRIBUTING.md #196
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
axelboc
force-pushed
the
quote_normalisation_link
branch
from
7bca54c to
873901a
Compare
GitHub doesn't automatically link to issues or pull requests when using the #N format which works in comments.
axelboc
force-pushed
the
quote_normalisation_link
branch
from
873901a to
f0a48b7
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
GitHub doesn't automatically link to issues or pull requests when using the #N format which works in comments.
This commit is inspired by the discussion here which shows that the description of quotes normalisation in
CONTRIBUTING.mdmight not be entirely clear for somebody new to the potential problem.Unfortunately (?), to me it does seem completely clear. I think it might be a topic that is obvious once you encounter the issue, but non-obvious before then.
I can't really think of how to improve the section without expanding it excessively, so at least I've made access to the expanded discussion in the relevant issue (#129) easier.