On Fri, 2016-12-09 at 19:48 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 09 Dec 2016 09:40:08 -0800, Adam Williamson wrote: > > > This is just a bunch of entirely unsupported assertions, and thus not > > worth the time to respond to. > > Same applies to your usage scenario. Personal experience is just that: > personal experience. Yes, but the burden of proof always lies with those who want to change stuff. I've got the easy job here: I just get to say 'look, if you want to change everything, provide some concrete evidence: a) that there's a problem b) that the changes will solve it c) that they won't create larger problems than the ones they solve' That's always how it works. You have to provide a justification for change. No justification is really needed for no-change. > Great! Then something else is the cause, such as editing bodhi tickets and > replacing builds or removing them. Whatever. Or else "dnf" would not find > installed packages with no reference in bodhi. And previous releases of > a package in the repo still get deleted, breaking history undo. Well, yes. I don't think it's ever been claimed that 'history undo' is guaranteed to always work. We've never claimed to keep every build that at some point landed in updates-testing or updates there forever, so far as I know. -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net http://www.happyassassin.net _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
