On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 07:02 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > So, do I understand you correctly that you as Yum/Dnf guys would be ok to > > > have a different backend for GUI and non-GUI use cases as mentioned in > > > this thread and agreed by FESCo previously? I'd be more than happy to > > > see your sign off for this change and state this too there. > > > > Well, it's a bit more complicated than that. Obviously there would be a > > "problem" with both programs offering different combinations of packages in > > some > > cases. But combined with the fact that the use case/target group of users > > (applications vs. packages) is different for both, I don't think it would be > > that much of an issue. > > Wouldn't it be easier to keep gpk-application and gpk-update-viewer > installed and set as default applications, and provide AppInstaller as > an alternative, experimental program (also installed by default, > perhaps)? It might be easier, but it'd probably suck more. gpk-application is pretty crappy, let's face it. It looks pretty bad if you compare it with just about any other distro's graphical package/app manager tools. This is something we are regularly dinged on in reviews. IMHO the sooner we replace it with something better, the...better. (And I'd hate to go another release without resolving https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=863592 , just to bang that drum again). -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
