2014-06-11 17:20 GMT+02:00 Jan Zelený <jzeleny@xxxxxxxxxx>:
That’s a pure illusion. The users have a compatibility expectation that their software will continue working. Compared to asking the users to notice and work around removal of “obsoleted stuff” in /usr/bin/yum, asking the users to notice and work around removal of “obsoleted stuff” in /usr/bin/yum and in addition to change the command name in their scripts is, AFAICT, just making things worse.The transition period is one reason why we want to keep the name dnf.Also, dnf
> needs to drop all the legacy options before the transition (ie) pick erase
> or remove (preferably the latter) etc rather than retain all the
> compatibility options.
The compatibility options can be kept in /usr/bin/yum without cluttering up /usr/bin/dnf.
Also presenting dnf as a separate project forked from yum gives us better
flexibility - for instance it's easier to drop obsoleted stuff because users
don't have that high compatibility expectations.
Mirek
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
