> * Compatibility > ** To improve user experience and to unify dnf/microdnf behavior we > were unable to keep 100% compatibility with formal Microdnf in > command-line and in behavior Can you comment more on this part? yum/dnf command-line and behaviour compatiblity made adoption fairly easy. (I know it wasn't 100%, but the major parts were compatible.) I see that e.g. microdnf5 doesn't have 'list': is this intentional? Lack of 'list' would break many basic dnf uses… Also, what is the plan for normal command-line use: microdnf5 or the dnfdaemon client? 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
