On 10 December 2015 at 14:44, Ian Malone <ibmalone@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 10 December 2015 at 11:51, Tim <ignored_mailbox@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Allegedly, on or about 09 December 2015, Ralf Corsepius sent: >>> My view: The only thing that was wrong with yum, was it being >>> work-in-progress, when its maintainer passed away. >> >> One hopes that something as central as the updating/installing tool >> would be (a) worked on by more than one person, and (b) sufficiently >> documented that the project could be taken over. >> >> My second point seems to be seriously lacking on Fedora. While I can't >> personally speak to documentation regarding software coding, the >> documentation for operating some software is sorely lacking. There are >> some distros where good documentation is a prerequisite to software >> being accepted. >> > > Was that not the case for YUM? It was worked on by more than one > person and while I don't know what the developer documentation for it > is like the end user documentation had been around for a long time. > The case, at least as Ralf put it, is that with the lead developer's > (tragic) death the people working on it decided to build something > else instead. > Though the chronology of that is wrong, because FESCO approved DNF in 2012, when it was already being suggested as a YUM replacement. -- imalone http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk -- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines Have a question? Ask away: http://ask.fedoraproject.org
