On Tue, Oct 19, 2004 at 04:17:06PM +0200, Matthias Saou wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote : > > I am not really concerned on the server-side, but more on the > > client-side. For example today's FC2 repos (or even RH7.3 repos > > like Fedora Legacy) may want to switch to the new metadata > > format. Offering both metadata formats on the server is not a real > > issue, but offering both clients for a transition period will be > > due to common naming. It would be nice to find a common way to > > deal with it (e.g. renaming yum 2.0.x to yum-2.0). > BTW, why would you want to offer _both_ clients? Once yum 2.2 goes final > and gets well tested, people should start using it instead, and any bugs > reported against it should get fixed (which is better than getting advice > like "switch back to yum 2.0.x"), and we'll all live happily ever after. That's true for a one-repo-user, but not for a multiple-repo-user where the repos will not support the new metadata format in the same minute. And having the package manager broken is quite severe, of course I would urge all to downgrade if that should happen (God beware), instead of having security fixes fly by while waiting for a depsolver fix ;) More concrete I would like to deploy yum-tng or whatever soon in bleeding/testing repos to shake out any bugs in the field (or voluntary testers that is ;) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum/attachments/20041019/6b2c1107/attachment.bin
