2014-10-09 8:57 GMT+02:00 Ralf Corsepius <rc040203@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > I do not. > I understand your point of view, in a different context (ie: dnf being default package manager), I would have shared yours. > > We need a precise and detailed functional description about what these "weak > dependencies" are supposed to do. > At least, we agree on that part. But there is already some documentation about their semantics, these have been used in OpenSUSE for a while, so there are data about it. > Also, we would need a precise and detailed description of how weak deps are > seen by non-weak-deps aware programs. > They are plainly ignored, I'm more worried about the behavioral differences between supported package managers. I'd rather ensure that people get a consistent user experience when installing packages, unlike Debian had during the time, they supported apt-get/aptitude. We should not worry about non-supported package managers > Otherwise chaos is pre-programmed. > As long they are ignored, they are not problematic. But if we were to change the default package manager or yum behavior (unlikely), that would change things. ATM, it really doesn't change anything, since i believe that we have enough time to experiment before F22/F23, let's get some feedbacks. Then, we could have actual data on good/bad practices, and improves at the same time dnf behavior if needed. H. > Ralf > > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
