> Again I would caution you against just blindly changing defaults to be > incompatible with yum ... even if the yum defaults are bad, every > incompatibility incurs a cost for all users (and it will exist as long > as yum and dnf are being used ... so like 10 years from now). At worst > speak with Zdenek about changing yum's defaults in future Fedora > versions, although even that's still going to be a problem for most > users. > > > In this case there's a reason skip_if_unavailable defaults to off, with > it on by default most of the package managers output is vastly more > suspect due to having no assurance about which repos. were actually used > to do the operation. And this is 100 worse for any code that does things > like "repo. X can't have packages that exist in repo. Y" > > Also a lot of errors become "silent" errors (so things are slow and > don't work well instead of explicitly saying: foo repo. is broken). > Indeed are the dropbox repos. likely to be broken, or would someone fix > them if they knew? Should users have them disabled by default and only > use --enablerepo occasionally? Should they not be implemented as a > direct repo. at all? Hello James, I responded to your comments in the bugzila: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=867389 Regarding Dropbox, it is broken for at least a month after each Fedora release, regularly. For F19 they added their repository just very recently. You can't force them to fix it. And even if you do, there will be always other repos which will have the same problem. In my bug report I speak for users who don't know that --enablerepo/--disablerepo exists. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
