multi-packages and dashed/non-dashed version suffixes (was: CVS commit: pkgsrc/misc/py-asciinema)

[Leonardo Taccari <leot%NetBSD.org@localhost>]

Hello Adam,
(moving the discussion to tech-pkg@, probably it is more general
question/curiosity not suitable for pkgsrc-changes@)

Adam Ciarcinski writes:
> [...]
> Index: pkgsrc/misc/py-asciinema/ALTERNATIVES
> diff -u pkgsrc/misc/py-asciinema/ALTERNATIVES:1.1 pkgsrc/misc/py-asciinema/ALTERNATIVES:1.2
> --- pkgsrc/misc/py-asciinema/ALTERNATIVES:1.1	Mon Dec 31 17:42:02 2018
> +++ pkgsrc/misc/py-asciinema/ALTERNATIVES	Fri Jan 18 08:56:41 2019
> @@ -1 +1,2 @@
> -bin/asciinema @PREFIX@/bin/asciinema@PYVERSSUFFIX@
> +bin/asciinema @PREFIX@/bin/asciinema-@PYVERSSUFFIX@
> [...]

This is mostly out of curiousity but why a `-' was added?
At least for shells that support command completion and/or if
pkg_alternatives(8) is used this is not a big difference, in other
cases this will require to type an extra character (I prefer the
version without dash :)).

Apart that, please document such changes in the commit message.  It is
user-visible and can break possible setup if pkg_alternatives(8) is not
used.


By grepping ALTERNATIVES of a few days old pkgsrc-current tree there
are:

 - ...@PYVERSSUFFIX@  (without dash): 121
 - ...-@PYVERSSUFFIX@    (with dash): 197

...and:

 - ...@RUBY_SUFFIX@   (without dash): 151
 - ...-@RUBY_SUFFIX@     (with dash): 0

So, in general - at least based on Python and Ruby packages - it
would be more consistent to avoid the dash, while for Python it is
now more consistent to add it.


So, more for the tech-pkg@ audience:

 - is it better to add or not add a dash to multi-packages?


Thank you!