[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: New CLI syntax for package version
From: |
shakmar |
Subject: |
Re: New CLI syntax for package version |
Date: |
Mon, 11 Jan 2016 17:01:46 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) |
Hi!
[…]
>>> 1. slash, <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D19219#25>
>>>
>>> guile:1.8/doc
>>> xterm-256-color:320
>>> emacs:24.5/out
>>>
>>> 2. underscore, <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D1921=
>9#28>
>>>
>>> emacs_24.5:out
>>>
>>> 3. at, <http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D19219#31>
>>>
>>> address@hidden
>>> address@hidden:doc
>>>
>>> What do people think?
>> My order of preference (highest preference first) is: 3., 1., 2.
>
> Me too.
> ben
The problem I see with 3. is that the mailing list archives will detect the
package names (with versions, ie the whole strings like address@hidden) as email
addresses, and hide them, by replacing them with address@hidden As an
example, here’s the mail I replied to:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2016-01/msg00343.html
If it wasn’t for this problem, my order of preference would be 3-1-2 too.
Thanks for the effort, by the way. :)
- Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots, (continued)
- Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots, Eric Bavier, 2016/01/21
- Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots, Jookia, 2016/01/21
- Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots, Andy Wingo, 2016/01/22
- Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots, Ricardo Wurmus, 2016/01/22
- Re: Version numbers for VCS snapshots, Ludovic Courtès, 2016/01/23
Re: New CLI syntax for package version, Federico Beffa, 2016/01/09