On 16. 8. 2013 at 15:20:57, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Matthias Clasen (mclasen@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > > On Fri, 2013-08-16 at 08:42 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote: > > > Actually no, the system is all hacked up and works in a super-abusive > > > way, see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=979083 > > > > That bug is really an illustration why it is just wrong to keep > > information about the update history in a semi-private 'db' that only > > yum gets to access. > > > > This information belongs into the journal. We have the change to fix > > that in the dnf transition. > > As long as the journal is rotated out at arbitrary times due to space > reasons, I really really don't think the information belongs there. Agreed. This information doesn't belong to journal and we have no intentions to put it there. > It should still be in a public db for other things to use, though. We already have a plan to extract the db-handling code from dnf to an external library. That should make the situation more developer friendly. Thanks Jan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
