Fix print typo in code block example in README

[MatthewJohn]

No description provided.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Base: 36.04% // Head: 36.04% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (acd1c2d) compared to base (b24f7db).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1066   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   36.04%   36.04%           
=======================================
  Files          38       38           
  Lines        6956     6956           
  Branches     1008     1008           
=======================================
  Hits         2507     2507           
  Misses       4341     4341           
  Partials      108      108           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[martyn-bristow]

Hello
This is valid python, and not a typo:

>>> pprint(data)
{'expand': 'renderedFields,names,schema,operations,editmeta,changelog,versionedRepresentations,customfield_18344.properties,customfield_18345.properties,customfield_18187.properties,customfield_11300.properties,customfield_12600.properties,customfield_10022.requestTypePractice,customfield_17400.properties',
 'fields': {'aggregateprogress': {'percent': 100,
                                  'progress': 38893200,
                                  'total': 38893200},
            'aggregatetimeestimate': None,
            'aggregatetimeoriginalestimate': None,
            'aggregatetimespent': 38893200,
            'assignee': None,
            'attachment': [],
            'comment': {'comments': [],
                        'maxResults': 0,

>>> print(data)
{'expand': 'renderedFields,names,schema,operations,editmeta,changelog,versionedRepresentations,customfield_18344.properties,customfield_18345.properties,customfield_18187.properties,customfield_11300.properties,customfield_12600.properties,customfield_10022.requestTypePractice,customfield_17400.properties', 'id
': '138135', 'self': 'https://corelims.atlassian.net/rest/api/2/issue/138135', 'key': 'INT-1', 'fields': {'customfield_18232': None, 'customfield_18111': None, 'customfield_18353': None, 'customfield_18112': None, 'customfield_18233': None, 'customfield_18354': None, 'customfield_18113': None, 'customfield_1823
4```

Using `pprint` better formats the verbose output from jira or another REST API

[gonchik]

@martyn-bristow Let's merge it.
I think we have to improve our docs :)

[martyn-bristow]

Sorry @gonchik , please read my comment! This does NOT improve the docs

The mention of pprint in the doc was originally correct. Pretty Print! It formats the json nicely

If you want to see the response in pretty print format JSON....
```from pprint import pprint
# you code here
# and then print using pprint(result) instead of print(result)
pprint(response)

Was correct. Using print will give you a flat structure.

If we want to advocate using only `print` then the lines above do this, and this is now a duplication

[gonchik]

@martyn-bristow hm, you know you're totally right.
I made a small mistake :(

[MatthewJohn]

Sorry @martyn-bristow, I was skimming too much :( Sorry for causing such a palaver!