From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48349) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dG2Tt-0001vu-MP for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 31 May 2017 08:12:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dG2Tq-0001q1-GQ for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 31 May 2017 08:12:05 -0400 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43603) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dG2Tq-0001ps-D3 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 31 May 2017 08:12:02 -0400 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dG2Tq-0003kM-1w for guix-patches@gnu.org; Wed, 31 May 2017 08:12:02 -0400 Subject: bug#26264: [PATCH 0/1] Use '@' to separate name, version in package-full-name Resent-Message-ID: From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=) References: <20170326122555.22366-1-alex@pompo.co> <6da6e290-feed-e500-e53a-d308e5dc9dde@tobias.gr> <877f3bx4m3.fsf@gmail.com> <87h92d30lw.fsf@gnu.org> <22f867cf-18f8-c08c-259e-afe86bff5ac6@tobias.gr> <45019b9a-565a-82a9-a0de-249cfe211cfa@tobias.gr> <87zie727yb.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 14:11:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87zie727yb.fsf@gmail.com> (Alex Sassmannshausen's message of "Sat, 20 May 2017 11:28:44 +0200") Message-ID: <87a85tfcpk.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: Alex Sassmannshausen Cc: 26264@debbugs.gnu.org Hi! Alex Sassmannshausen skribis: > On the bright side, it seems both me and Tobias are touching the same > files in our patches, and presumably have done some testing =E2=80=94 so = either > patch should work nicely. > > I'm happy for either patch to be pushed. Same here. :-) Tobias, thoughts? ISTR Tobias wasn=E2=80=99t enthusiastic about the idea of an optional argument. Anyway we should push something now! Thanks, Ludo=E2=80=99.