From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name>
Subject: bug#19219: New command-line syntax for package + version?
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:16:31 -0500
Message-ID: <20151231011631.GB23122@jasmine>
References: <20141129203122.GA15720@debian> <87ppbws61p.fsf@gnu.org>
	<874mfssrxd.fsf@gnu.org> <87si3ah1d1.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87h9jblks4.fsf@gnu.org> <87k2o7h3ux.fsf@gnu.org>
	<8737uu9pro.fsf@gnu.org> <87oad8vxkx.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
	<87io3fo8sl.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53725)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aERrY-0006gq-5V
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:17:09 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aERrS-000861-Tv
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:17:07 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43159)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aERrS-00085T-QR
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:17:02 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aERrS-0008Ph-EG
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:17:02 -0500
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.19219.B19219.145152459332289@debbugs.gnu.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <87io3fo8sl.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: Bug reports for GNU Guix <bug-guix.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-guix>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-guix@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-guix>,
	<mailto:bug-guix-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org>
Cc: 19219@debbugs.gnu.org

On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 11:45:14PM +0100, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
> ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes:
> 
> > I had to think a lot because that’s a big change (technically simple I
> > think, but it’s the change of UI and habits that’s bigger ;-)).  I came
> > to the conclusion that it’s probably a necessary thing.
> 
> Sure, such change should not be made lightly.
> 
> > Regarding the aesthetics, I’d be in favor of using @ for the version:
> 
> You mean like npm...  :)
> 
> >   guile@1.8
> >   guile@1.8:doc
> >
> > I’m not sure if we should also allow:
> >
> >   guile:doc@1.8
> >
> > Thoughts?
> 
> I'm OK with that.  Since choosing the reserved characters is not a
> technical decision, maybe we could poll users?

I think we should poll a big list of packages and see which characters
are most safe to use.

The question is: which big list? Debian's?

> 
> --
> Mathieu Lirzin
> 
> 
>