From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?utf-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] gnu: python-llfuse: Update to 1.0, keep 0.41 variant.
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 17:25:58 +0100
Message-ID: <871t7bn1wp.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <cover.1457998381.git.leo@famulari.name>
	<2b02c8822902a099fe7daf291684090eff6a6ed5.1457998381.git.leo@famulari.name>
	<87h9g82kc2.fsf@gmail.com> <20160315091308.GA7634@jasmine>
	<87y49koxs4.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34916)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1afrnK-0007v0-0d
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:26:06 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <ludo@gnu.org>) id 1afrnJ-0000YB-3f
	for guix-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 15 Mar 2016 12:26:05 -0400
In-Reply-To: <87y49koxs4.fsf@gnu.org> (Mathieu Lirzin's message of "Tue, 15
	Mar 2016 11:12:11 +0100")
List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution."
	<guix-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:guix-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guix-devel>,
	<mailto:guix-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
To: Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Alex Kost <alezost@gmail.com>

Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org> skribis:

> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 15, 2016 at 11:53:33AM +0300, Alex Kost wrote:
>>> Leo Famulari (2016-03-15 02:34 +0300) wrote:
>>>=20
>>> [...]
>>> >  (define-public python2-llfuse
>>> > -  (package-with-python2 python-llfuse))
>>> > +  (package (inherit (package-with-python2
>>> > +                 (strip-python2-variant python-llfuse)))
>>> > +    (propagated-inputs `(("python2-contextlib2" ,python2-contextlib2=
)))))
>>> > +
>>> > +;; For attic@0.16
>>> > +(define-public python-llfuse@0.41
>>>=20
>>> All our package variables use '-' to separate name and version.  I think
>>> this is good choice and we shouldn't use '@' in variable names.
>>
>> Okay, I replaced all use of '@' with '-'.
>>
>> Is the '@' syntax is only meant to be used on the command line?
>
> This syntax has appeared to solve some limitations in the command line
> interface which was failing to properly match package names containing
> numbers.
>
> I think it is OK to use it elsewhere as long as it does not break
> things.  However in the case of scheme variables, I think it is not a
> good idea to use '@' because it could lead people into thinking that
> there is a strong relation between typing =E2=80=98guix build foo@14=E2=
=80=99 and
> defining a variable named =E2=80=98foo@14=E2=80=99.

Furthermore =E2=80=98@=E2=80=99 (at sign) has a special meaning in Guile (i=
nfo "(guile)
Using Guile Modules"), so even though it=E2=80=99s currently valid within an
identifier, I=E2=80=99d suggest avoiding it.

Ludo=E2=80=99.