From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?=)
Subject: bug#19219: New command-line syntax for package + version?
Date: Fri, 01 Jan 2016 16:55:40 +0100
Message-ID: <87k2nti9ab.fsf@gnu.org>
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> <20151231011631.GB23122@jasmine>
	<20151231100934.231cee5b@debian-netbook>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Return-path: <bug-guix-bounces+gcggb-bug-guix=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54807)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aFBMX-0006Xf-5r
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:52:10 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aFBMT-0002v3-UL
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:52:09 -0500
Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:45924)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aFBMT-0002uz-Qq
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:52:05 -0500
Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1aFBMT-0008BW-M2
	for bug-guix@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jan 2016 20:52:05 -0500
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.19219.B19219.145169951831349@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <20151231100934.231cee5b@debian-netbook> (Efraim Flashner's
	message of "Thu, 31 Dec 2015 10:09:34 +0200")
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: Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il>
Cc: 19219@debbugs.gnu.org, Mathieu Lirzin <mthl@gnu.org>

Efraim Flashner <efraim@flashner.co.il> skribis:

> On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:16:31 -0500
> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 11:45:14PM +0100, Mathieu Lirzin wrote:
>>  [...]=20=20
>>  [...]=20=20
>>  [...]=20=20
>>  [...]=20=20
>>  [...]=20=20
>>  [...]=20=20
>> >=20
>> > I'm OK with that.  Since choosing the reserved characters is not a
>> > technical decision, maybe we could poll users?=20=20
>>=20
>> I think we should poll a big list of packages and see which characters
>> are most safe to use.
>>=20
>> The question is: which big list? Debian's?
>>=20
>>=20
>=20=20
> When debian adopted multiarch=20

[...]

I forgot to reply to Leo=E2=80=99s message, but it seems clear to me that it
only makes sense to discuss on Guix mailing lists.  I don=E2=80=99t think a=
nyone
else cares about the syntax of Guix=E2=80=99s command-line interface.  ;-)

Ludo=E2=80=99.