On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 02:09, Hisham <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 7:26 PM, Alexander Gladysh <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hisham, please comment on the "LR team" official position for this issue. >> Should I rename all my rocks to get rid of dots as they will not be >> supported ever, or should I just wait for 2.0.4 where dots would be >> supported? (I can afford to wait in this case.) > Well, since the documentation and the rockspec checker allowed it, one > could say the format was underspecified in this regard and the > excessive strictness of the dependency checker is a bug. ;) So yeah, I > don't see a problem in allowing dots in the next release, but then > it's a good idea to properly specify valid rock names. Cool, thanks! > My proposal is > then the following pattern: "^[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9%.%-%_]*$" (yes, > explicitly restricting it to the ASCII alphabet; don't want to step > into problems with different installations of Lua interpreting > character classes differently because of variations in C runtime > configuration). Looks good to me. Alexander. _______________________________________________ Luarocks-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.luaforge.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/luarocks-developers
