I'd like to ask for reconsideration on an edit I suggested; based on this meta question, I believe Meta is where such a request belongs.

The post in question is an answer to a question I asked, What does the double-hyphen do in `lxc exec`.

I thought @Peter Van Heusden's answer was precise and thorough (also kind, since as he said, there's an argument to be said that my question was a duplicate, only I haven't realized what's actually behind the behavior I was seeing), but it did have some formatting issues.

@muru corrected those, but in so doing s/he also made a change which I feel needs to be rolled back:

1. The question dealt with LXD; Peter Van Heusden made an example involving a shell in both the host and the container, and used the shell prompt to distinguish the two (in a container, typically one gets a root@container:~# prompt). muru felt it was "unnecessarily long", but I actually think they help to understand which parts of the example work in which context.

Additionally, (something I mistakenly thought muru changed, but was in the original)

2. A sudo call was used in the example to run the lxc command-line tool, which is redundant. In practice, I believe it therefore shouldn't be used (hence I edited it out; again, I was thinking it's a roll-back), but as an edit it might be considered superficial -- I'll be glad to hear what you think.

I believe the two reviewers who rejected my edit (to roll these changes back, while keeping the changes to format) might not have looked at the edit history, nor realized that it's (now, partially) a roll-back. I might be wrong, but I believe the answer is better with the two changes I suggested. (To me it is, in any case.)