On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 04:25:40PM -0500, Leo Famulari wrote: > On Fri, Jan 01, 2016 at 04:55:40PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > Efraim Flashner <efr...@flashner.co.il> skribis: > > > > > On Wed, 30 Dec 2015 20:16:31 -0500 > > > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, Dec 30, 2015 at 11:45:14PM +0100, Mathieu Lirzin wrote: > > >> [...] > > >> [...] > > >> [...] > > >> [...] > > >> [...] > > >> [...] > > >> > > > >> > I'm OK with that. Since choosing the reserved characters is not a > > >> > technical decision, maybe we could poll users? > > >> > > >> I think we should poll a big list of packages and see which characters > > >> are most safe to use. > > >> > > >> The question is: which big list? Debian's? > > >> > > >> > > > > > > When debian adopted multiarch > > > > [...] > > > > I forgot to reply to Leo’s message, but it seems clear to me that it > > only makes sense to discuss on Guix mailing lists. I don’t think anyone > > else cares about the syntax of Guix’s command-line interface. ;-) > > I don't mean that we should discuss it on Debian's mailing list. I mean > that we should consult the largest list of packages that we can find in > order to learn which characters are safest to choose as reserved. Debian > has a very long list of packages.
Of course, Debian has to choose how to name their packages, so the list provided by `apt-cache pkgnames` is not the same as the list of upstream names. But it does give some idea of what is possible once everything is packaged. I did this: $ apt-cache pkgnames | tr -d 'a-zA-Z0-9' | tr -d - | tr -d '\n' The only remaining characters were '.' and '+'. So it could be possible to reserve : and @ without causing too many problems. > > > > > Ludo’.
