Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 12:36:15PM +0200, Miro Hrončok wrote: >>> As package maintainers we all make technical decisions which have >>> significant impact on our users every day - whether that's in the >>> choice of defaults, choice of build flags, or whatever. Honestly >>> delivering as modules-vs-non-modules is a completely trivial issue >>> compared to most of the stuff I spend time on. If "yum install X" >>> still works most people just don't care about the RPM/dnf/repo >>> mechanics behind that. >> >> Except it works only half way. The installation works. Later, >> dependencies are broken. Upgrades are broken. "yum remove X" does not >> undo the action completely. >> >> The main issue is: user just enabled a module without doing it >> explicitly. The user needs to know how to handle modules in order to >> recover. > > I never expect "yum remove X" to be the inverse of "yum install > X". DNF's magical leaf tracking makes it a bit more so, but not > exactly. So, I don't think we should make that a very high priority > concern (although if we can improve it, so much the better). I don't think it's an unreasonable expectation, especially for those coming from APT land (Debian, Ubuntu) where `apt install foo` *is* the inverse operation of `apt remove foo`. Thanks, --Robbie
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
