On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 09:10:44AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote: > Dne 11. 10. 21 v 20:14 Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek napsal(a): > >>Nothing is broken **now**. But it very often broke N+1 or N+2 > >>upgrade. I remember some package broken N+5 upgrade. And then you > >>(or some co-maintainer) hesitated to add it to > >>fedora-obsolete-packages because "it is too old".:) > >That's why we should keep packages in f-o-p for much longer than we > >currently do. There was just a thread about Jiri upgrading from F22 > >to a recent release. That procedure would have been made easier if > >f-o-p had more packages. > > +1, but... It does not solve the problem that users want to have two-speed line for package removal. > > You want to remove *all* packages which are retired and blocks the upgrade. That is what f-o-p does. > > And you *may* want to remove *some* packages that are retired. That is what remove-retired-package does. > > You removes package for which you have replacement or you do not use > them. But you want to keep packages which you use and there is not > functional replacement for them. Hopefully for transition period. Yeah, remove-retired-packages would provide functionality that we currently don't have. But for the part where you *need* to remove uninstallable packages, f-o-p is a better solution (and it's already there, so no need to reimplement it.) Zbyszek _______________________________________________ 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 Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
