[feat] Support version-like environment names

[RiMillo]

This relaxes the validation schema for environment names to allow, for instance, foo-1.0.0, 2026.09.0.

Fixes #3645.

[RiMillo]

Hello,

I pushed it as draft because I would like to check with maintainers some things first:

• If new ref name is acceptable, alphanum_ext_vers_string
• If pattern is OK or should be extended (e.g., to accepts names like foo-1.0.0+alpha, notice + not included now)
• If it should be applied also to system and partition names (ATM, it's only for environment)
• If a test is needed. If so, guidance / suggestions are appreciated. ATM, I found something that might be related, test_validate_config_invalid_syntax, but it checks only system names.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 91.92%. Comparing base (00ffd41) to head (315bba9).

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #3720   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    91.92%   91.92%           
========================================
  Files           62       62           
  Lines        13808    13808           
========================================
  Hits         12693    12693           
  Misses        1115     1115           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[RiMillo]

Not sure how to deal with failing CI-job about performance benchmark(?)

[vkarak]

@RiMillo Thanks for the PR. In principle it is fine to add the leading digits, . and + in the alphanum_ext_string but it is a bit more complicated than this. I don't want to introduce yet another category, so this change would have to be applied in the alphanum_ext_string. This implies that the mini-language that validates the valid_systems and valid_prog_environs must also be adapted. Practically, it needs to start accepting +, because it is otherwise already accepting leading digits and hyphens. On the other hand, extras keys should probably be strictly alphanumeric in POSIX fashion (no leading digits, no hyphens, no pluses), which now are not.

In summary, we need to once and consistently fix the various patterns; I will try pushing another PR with all these changes.

[vkarak]

@RiMillo Can you try out #3725 ?

[vkarak]

Superseded by #3725, closing.