From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp1 ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id Ta69DHBiamD9IgEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 03:05:52 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:8:6d80::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp1 with LMTPS id wNiJBXBiamB2cgAAbx9fmQ (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 05 Apr 2021 01:05:52 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B6A914DB1 for ; Mon, 5 Apr 2021 03:05:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:41904 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lTDgc-0000Sb-9L for larch@yhetil.org; Sun, 04 Apr 2021 21:05:50 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41986) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lTDgP-0000SS-F2 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Apr 2021 21:05:37 -0400 Received: from imta-37.everyone.net ([216.200.145.37]:35872 helo=imta-38.everyone.net) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lTDgN-00010G-2d for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Apr 2021 21:05:36 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by imta-38.everyone.net (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with SMTP id 13513XnA021791; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 18:05:32 -0700 X-Eon-Originating-Account: jckw8etRWysX1zQOv1Cybgk44Duc9QQ_De3UwmD-CPA X-Eon-Dm: m0116293.ppops.net Received: by m0116293.mta.everyone.net (EON-AUTHRELAY2 - 5a81d41c) id m0116293.60622039.62f0b; Sun, 4 Apr 2021 18:05:31 -0700 X-Eon-Sig: AQMHrIJgamJbEOtYDQIAAAAD,ddd637cea8b9ec6e454fe0f82786ae05 X-Eip: DXaZxfe-tku6_UzjV-X9auX7W4UAK0RZeDCzksMn5Hk Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2021 03:05:23 +0200 From: Bengt Richter To: Mark H Weaver Subject: Re: Why ban underscores? Message-ID: <20210405010523.GA2473@LionPure> References: <87v991vkpi.fsf@nckx> <87tuol7oa7.fsf@netris.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87tuol7oa7.fsf@netris.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Proofpoint-GUID: kxhyB8lhq2tuVsDKUUCDEzBxhdh0TOm1 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: kxhyB8lhq2tuVsDKUUCDEzBxhdh0TOm1 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.369, 18.0.761 definitions=2021-04-05_01:2021-04-01, 2021-04-04 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 clxscore=1034 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxlogscore=579 impostorscore=0 adultscore=0 priorityscore=1501 mlxscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2104030000 definitions=main-2104050003 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=216.200.145.37; envelope-from=bokr@oz.net; helo=imta-38.everyone.net X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Bengt Richter Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1617584751; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post; bh=EAgTQ6t/FliFQvpBAHdqnfgD67OYeCA1XTNTqzgMvmI=; b=ZgPZl91bEqJpHa+rvAnjsApIfN/JzjqBl6LHuuXAxBoipK+UzS6vwBGKKpevrijSoKuzW/ lgHeolwK8UQJCgver8fRu4fJ8ShsdNF7J9xt4zN/El9gT3bsDP5iF5Q5Uwx45NyMKdJwpj MN+e6jRlEiXwcZ72mF2C4b4P1AgyWvMz8lSXras2lMnJUf6n9evjyQ6RCj1vtKwMD1VJwn GauQNHACiJzbuBsws1H2JHcCMdb96EOnOCgHBz8zng0jZ7mHLgyOTX5CPB5rBu/givFkMR ROEKVsWpg6yaF4u2kogQ6n65eb6nr+b5nHWWGqJvUZsFiHZB/8f6fNuHvdyLvA== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1617584751; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=PH/6mZ4nydq8h/FSIjC3oFSVcBtmmcq+qvpXyXc9lvWPRMlHWpHr/JiDjxTBseZhodk6cP XfmcAyqTQaao6UI4q5H3TCD8CBjvTx/lct5fL0y3gE4HD6Xo9OvU0x2V1J4Rr0kuBgxjJS lkBaH12zzX+fi4d1tKh7/7qf6Q6zPArccy3TpnRF4ymokPb02GweUzlF8jmlLVzHMDz9RJ tefFcGLfThy3j9qLvGZlQw5WBBrEEkTC/KiWPCUvhPiLVJ4rP0ZL935Kp2g7QfrmI8UxT9 8OVc5kMOjk8y95nlKisaX4iG0cqv6iAj7NSGIy8z6pjm2z5i+YwA8mtU7211cA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -0.94 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=guix-devel-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 1B6A914DB1 X-Spam-Score: -0.94 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: nZMXc1GM3rXa Hi, On +2021-04-04 17:05:57 -0400, Mark H Weaver wrote: > Tobias Geerinckx-Rice writes: > > > Indeed, underscores were explicitly banned in 2014 (commit > > 25083588). Why? > > > > Where's the advantage in renaming the following packages from > > their canonical names? > > While I was not involved in this decision, I think it's desirable to > standardize on a single hyphen-like character. Otherwise, it is likely > that people who prefer "_" over "-" will start using "_" in newly added > package names, which could lead to a proliferation of undesirable > diversity in our choices of hyphen-like characters. Then, we'd all have > to remember when typing a package name: "is this one of those packages > that uses underscores instead of hyphens?" > > Mark > I note that underscore is not one of the safe 73 characters mentioned in rfc2049. Maybe related? -- Regards, Bengt Richter