On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Steve Clark <sclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený: > > 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. They should not. And dnf is not yum, I'm really sorry if you think > it is. > > the user expects that anyways if you replace something he > did not asked for replace it and what just worked for him > > Well there are different levels of "works" i.e just because something works > that > something does not have to be the best possible implementation of > "something" ... > > Horses worked too but at some point we decided that cars work better > and moved on. > > Yes but who is this better for? A few developers or the mass of people and > documentation that > are used to using "yum". > > With cars it was obviously better for me - dnf not so obvious. Well I replied to his general statements about developers "not understanding simple facts" ... that aside ... it fits pretty well the horse (yum) is slower so takes longer to get the job done as the car (dnf) ;) -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
