2014-06-11 15:02 GMT+02:00 Rahul Sundaram <metherid@xxxxxxxxx>:
I strongly agree with this for practical reasons. There is no good rationale for moving away from yum as the name of the command except some of the command line changes which happened with yum anyway (download only was added and later removed for example) and one can warn specifically for those.
Yeah, if the compatibility is there, it should just be there. Software is here to server users, so the appropriate thing to do on (yum update) is to update the system, not to use this as an appropriate moment to essentially advertise users about a new project or about our achievements (even though the dnf project is an achievement, don’t get me wrong).
It makes sense to only add new features to the (dnf) command, or to warn/fail when the yum compatibility doesn’t actually exist. But when the compatibility exists, the right thing for the users is to just do what was asked, no questions asked.
It makes sense to only add new features to the (dnf) command, or to warn/fail when the yum compatibility doesn’t actually exist. But when the compatibility exists, the right thing for the users is to just do what was asked, no questions asked.
(Structurally, this would also allow you to separate the compatibility UI hacks in /usr/bin/yum, keeping /usr/bin/dnf a bit more clean.)
Mirek
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
