Re: Why is yum not liked by some? -- CVS analogy (and why you're not getting it)

[lesmikesell at gmail.com (Les Mikesell)]

On Fri, 2005-09-09 at 04:19, Johnny Hughes wrote:

> Having a configuration date/time feature in yum ... whereby anything
> after a specific point in time would not be considered in the resolution
> process might be a good thing (from the standpoint of configuration
> management).  But that would not really do anything to verify that
> certain packages were stable,

You have to pull the newest at some point before you can decide
that.  The missing piece is the ability to repeat an update
without pulling newer untested changes.  The 'repository
stability' issue would never be a problem when limiting the
run to a time when a prior run did what you want.

>  nor would it give you the flexibility to
> take certain packages newer than that date which you want while testing
> others.

The ability to specify packages is already there, and I'd expect
the timestamp limit to be specified per run - so you could still
get whatever you want.

How often do you remove or modify existing files in the repositories?
My premise is based on having all changes be the addition of
new files.

-- 
  Les Mikesell
    lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx