> From: Alec Leamas [mailto:leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 09:39 > To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: F25 System Wide Change: Use /etc/distro.repos.d as default > reposdir > > > > On 19/05/16 15:16, John Florian wrote: > >> From: Jonathan Wakely [mailto:jwakely@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 15:15 > >> > >> Another +1 here. There are plenty of software vendors (e.g. Google and > >> Adobe, to name two people might have heard of) that provide the option > of > >> installing their software via an RPM, which installs a .repo file into > >> /etc/yum.repos.d. That's cool, well done software vendors, we should > >> applaud them, not break their stuff, or force them to provide one RPM > >> for Fedora and another for RHEL+CentOS etc. > > Yes, please don't break their goodwill. If this must be renamed, > backwards compatibility is a must IMHO. > > I have yet to see the arguments why this really must be renamed. Of > course, there are better names than /etc/yum.repos.d. But does the > benefits of a better name really motivate the cost of change in this > case? Really? > > In other words, as Mathieu Bridon pointed out, the "Benefit to Fedora" > part of the change just isn't very convincing. I totally agree -- I too have yet to see why it should be renamed at all. My point was merely that, if for some reason this does go forward (justified or not), it would be disappointing if this were to break the efforts of vendors that have been trying to cooperate in a reasonable manner. -- John Florian -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
