On 18/05/16 15:02 -0400, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 11:10:57AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
On Fri, 2016-05-13 at 15:19 +0200, Petr Spacek wrote:
>
> +1
>
> The Change Page did not even try to weight pros and cons. IMHO cons (as
> described above) are worse that living with original name, which is
> well-known, well-documented, and relied on.
Another +1 here. I think the name should stay. Changing it brings no
significant benefits but will certainly break stuff, and render huge
amounts of existing information obsolete.
I happen to agree, but that argument was lost on the yum -> dnf
rename.
I'm still hoping sanity will prevail and once Yum's deprecation period
ends and it goes away, "yum" will become an alias for "dnf".
i.e. you can always use "yum", it's just for a while you'll get
annoying warnings, and the precise syntax will change between Yum v1
and Yum v2 (aka DNF).
We're managing a Python2 -> Python3 transition without printing
"Warning, Python2 is obsolete, see 'man py2py3' for details."
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
