Perhaps because this is a multi-file package, the Commentary in the .el file isn't being properly displayed in package manager.
Some IRC conversation:
wgreenhouse: Luke: I dunno if this is how melpa is doing it, but (info "(elisp) Multi-file Packages") suggests that for a multi-file package, a file README is expected for the long description, instead of the ;;; Commentary: header
legoscia`: wgreenhouse: I stumbled upon that sentence in the documentation a few days ago, but I couldn't find anything in the source that suggests that the README file is actually used. ";;; Commentary" seems to be the only way.
wgreenhouse: legoscia`: so whose ;;; Commentary gets used in case of a multifile package?
legoscia`: wgreenhouse: I think it's the .el file that matches the package name, but when I try to look it up in the source, I tumble down a rabbit hole...
Perhaps because this is a multi-file package, the Commentary in the
.el
file isn't being properly displayed in package manager.Some IRC conversation: