On Fri, Aug 08, 2003 at 09:38:57PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > at the risk of being called before the committee on unamerican > activities I have to say that the 'commercial possibilities' aren't > terribly interesting to me. I didn't write yum to make money. I wrote it > (hah) to make my life easier. I understand that there are people using > yum commercially and I think that's great. But if yum ads too much > complexity in the name of making it commercially viable I'll be very > disappointed. As one of the persons interested in "enterprise use", I want to make a few comments here. I think the world "commercial" is not the main word here. When writing software myself, I always aim at software universally usable, so also in big, complex environments, usally called "enterprise environments". After using UNIX for more than 20 years now, I want all software to be extremely flexible, configurable, and powerfull. And still small and understandable (sometimes I remember of the good old UNIX V7 days...). W.r.t. Yum, I think any RFE I have is also applicable in, for example, large university networks. Or even in smaller environments with a more complex structure. I think Seth's main ideas to make it not too complex are good, but I hope that suggestions to make it more universally usable still have a good chance. As I said before on another list (IIRC), today I have to stick with APT because of some missing features. But I like Yum more from a software point of view (much smaller, Python, etc.) than APT and I hope to be able to provide some help (either in discussions or in contributed code) to make it also satisfy more universal needs. Just my EUR 0,02... -- -- Jos Vos <jos@xxxxxx> -- X/OS Experts in Open Systems BV | Phone: +31 20 6938364 -- Amsterdam, The Netherlands | Fax: +31 20 6948204
