From murdoch@dunc@n @end|ng |rom gm@||@com  Fri Aug  9 22:17:46 2019
From: murdoch@dunc@n @end|ng |rom gm@||@com (Duncan Murdoch)
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 16:17:46 -0400
Subject: [Rd] Underscores in package names
In-Reply-To: <CAD4oTHHGvPDXg1uKhMO9KKjgPRDfYxUug8fTLLwj-sJdUw9Vfg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAD6tx94RYHAWCFVuMgMXLUUFG3BgKSCfs3Un=SStQ7rCtgAUSQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKFxdiRMmGwf1AWEBPvu4xtkhQpC6-Xoava2ZVwgxcz0jRkYyg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAN--Dz2=ScCo985xtKQrVbmkWEq4hq=q2QD5V-DKQxeCQdhNrw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAD4oTHHGvPDXg1uKhMO9KKjgPRDfYxUug8fTLLwj-sJdUw9Vfg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <7c89e005-37a4-16f9-4ef7-f3f186213944@gmail.com>

On 09/08/2019 2:41 p.m., Gabriel Becker wrote:
> Note that this proposal would make mypackage_2.3.1 a valid *package name*,
> whose corresponding tarball name might be mypackage_2.3.1_2.3.2 after a
> patch. Yes its a silly example, but why allow that kind of ambiguity?
> 
CRAN already has a package named "FuzzyNumbers.Ext.2", whose tarball is 
FuzzyNumbers.Ext.2_3.2.tar.gz, so I think we've already lost that game.

Duncan Murdoch



[Rd] Underscores in package names
Duncan Murdoch