On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 14:53 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote: > > So not wanting users to complain about “yum” no longer having some > features > > is the only reason for dropping the yum name I have seen in this thread > > (also called “setting expectations”); have I missed other reasons? > > No, there is not. But I think you misunderstood the reason, although not by > much. The fact is that dnf *is* different project than yum, let's not try to > mask it. The vast majority of code base is different (> 85% for sure), its > architecture is different, the community is different, the entire nature of the > project is different. And the fact that its CLI interface tries to be as > compatible as possible with yum doesn't change any of this. I understand that you want to rename the project to show that it is a new thing, but do users of yum really care about these facts? Do as a user you really care if bind 9 was a total rewrite of bind 8? I believe you overestimate how much users of software care about the inner workings. > That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is that renaming this > project to yum will do nothing else than to confuse its users, as they will > think this is still yum and they should expect from dnf it what they expected > from yum. I again think you overestimate what users think of software. They don't think of yum as a particular code-base. Yum is the tool, like hammer is the tool. If you replace a hammer by a new redesigned hammer, it is still a hammer even if not 100% identical. regards, Nikos -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
