cask/audit: allow @ for versioned casks

[cho-m]

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document?
• Have you checked to ensure there aren't other open Pull Requests for the same change?
• Have you added an explanation of what your changes do and why you'd like us to include them?
• Have you written new tests for your changes? Here's an example.
• Have you successfully run brew style with your changes locally?
• Have you successfully run brew typecheck with your changes locally?
• Have you successfully run brew tests with your changes locally?

---

Specifically for homebrew-cask-versions migration into homebrew-cask (Homebrew/homebrew-cask#112102).

Unlike Formulae, we don't need to worry about replacing @ in token name to AT so can handle this the easy way by just loosening audit.

[apainintheneck]

This makes sense to me.

[bevanjkay]

Thanks @cho-m

[cho-m]

Going to merge this to unblock us in migration. We can always modify audit further if needed or we find this approach isn't ideal.

cc @Homebrew/cask if anyone wants to make any comments after merge, which I will follow up on.

[reitermarkus]

What should happen to casks that currently use -at-, e.g. folding-at-home and folding-at-home-beta?

Is folding@home@beta fine? Do we then treat folding@home different from e.g. folding@beta.

[reitermarkus]

Oh right, I missed “cask token @ unrelated to versioning …”.

[cho-m]

Oh right, I missed “cask token @ unrelated to versioning …”.

I went with the simplest option of only allowing a single @ and that it should not be used in base/unversioned name.

One thing the audit doesn't catch is misuse of that @. We can make this stricter by only allowing version formats and a fixed list of "terms" (e.g. alpha, beta, dev, ...), but I wasn't sure what those needed to be.

For formulae, we check there is an unversioned formula. If this can be guaranteed for official Casks, then we can add audit.

[MikeMcQuaid]

Thanks again @cho-m!

[reitermarkus]

If this can be guaranteed for official Casks, then we can add audit.

I think so. There won't be an app@beta if there is no stable app. There won't be an app@1 if there is no app with version 2.

[p-linnane]

I think so. There won't be an app@beta if there is no stable app. There won't be an app@1 if there is no app with version 2.

We do accept casks that only have unstable versions with no stable release. There may be a case for using @beta there.

[cho-m]

I think so. There won't be an app@beta if there is no stable app. There won't be an app@1 if there is no app with version 2.

We do accept casks that only have unstable versions with no stable release. There may be a case for using @beta there.

Don't we use unversioned name for these and just keep the name when it becomes stable? At least according to our (soon outdated) docs: https://docs.brew.sh/Acceptable-Casks#but-there-is-no-stable-version. I think the current approach is fine to avoid extra versioned Casks.

If we migrate some Casks without modifying name, e.g. safari-technology-preview, then it may be fine to do audit. Or if there are edge cases, adding an audit exception for those.

[reitermarkus]

We do accept casks that only have unstable versions with no stable release. There may be a case for using @beta there.

Yes, but we just use the unversioned name in that case, since there will eventually be a stable version.

[cho-m]

Also, opened WIP update to audit in #16882. Although we don't need it for homebrew/cask-versions, I think it is worth adding . support in version since we support that in formulae and external Casks use this naming. And modifying the outdated -beta/etc check.