Am 14.06.2014 03:04, schrieb Michael Scherer: > Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 15:07 +0200, Petr Spacek a écrit : >> On 13.6.2014 14:58, Reindl Harald 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 >>> >>> why do so many developers not understand that simple fact? >> >> I don't think that simple fact that DNF is re-write of YUM justifies re-naming >> and re-training all users. Users don't care what you do with the source. And >> of course, users will complain no matter what you do. > > Like they complained when up2date was replaced by yum ? > when zipper replaced whatever they used to have on *suse before ? > When pkgin replaced pkg_add on some of the BSD ? > > It happened in the past, and I do not remember seeing so much > complains.. maybe people just have enough of repeated iterations every few months breaking compatibility left and right while it would have been possible to replace/improve things without breakage as said repeatly in that thread: go ahead and propose to rename GNOME3 because it is no longer GNOME go ahead and propose to rename Linux because 3.15 is no longer Linux 1.0 and that changes where much bigger than a fork of YUM renamed for no good reason especially in context of replace it
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
