Christian Muehlhaeuser

@jordanbtucker The plan is indeed to make glamour fully CommonMark compliant, and we're already using a bunch of their test-cases. I agree that we still have some work to do...

I'd like to keep this open, this is still something I plan to work on.

Can you try to be a bit more specific, please? What exactly is broken?

Could you provide some code and a screenshot of this, so I can try to reproduce it? Thank you!

You can use a `replace` directive in the `go.mod` file or temporarily disable Go modules and use your local checkout in `GOPATH`. This explains it fairly well, I think: https://teivah.medium.com/how-to-test-a-local-branch-with-go-mod-54df087fc9cc

It identifies `2.6`, `2.20` and `1.16` as valid numbers, whereas all the other entries are considered strings. We will have to fix the table alignment.

I'm afraid I still haven't looked into it, so no ETA at this point. Help is always appreciated though!

To elaborate a bit more: currently we let the table renderer automatically detect column alignments, which is probably causing this issue. I think we should try to tackle this along...

Glow does currently reflow the text to make the text fit the desired line width. Do you have a markdown example?

You're right, we're currently re-flowing the text to fit the desired output width. We should make this optional.