On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 3:21 PM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Right now the retirement guidelines state that you should only retire in > branched (prior to freeze) and up to master... > > But I just had a user bitten by a change in behaviour between dnf and yum > that was discovered here: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1096506 > > This is the bug raised with my package: > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1342249 > > It seems very unintuitive to the user, and wasn't initially apparent to me > until I look at all open dnf bugs and did a "find on page" for "obsolete" > > For now I've opened a rel-eng ticket to get the letsencrypt packages > properly removed from the F23 repos so that a dnf install letsencrypt, like > F24 behaviour, will install certbot. > > I guess the real question is - is the dnf behaviour correct, and if the dnf > behaviour isn't going to change should we allow packagers to retire from a > released branch? The DNF behavior is not correct, as something that has a Provides line should be considered equivalent, even if it also has an Obsoletes line. Since this is *not* how DNF behaves currently, it should be corrected ASAP. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
