So, coming back to the steps needed for this to happen as discussed in the FESCo ticket, I think the first one is to decide how users can start testing dnf5 on "expendable" machines. The proposal says that dnf5 can be installed in parallel with dnf. I think this doesn't highlight what things will be broken, as tools will still use dnf. Also, @zbysek asked in the FESCo ticket what data from the RPM database is shared between the two, but didn't receive a reply: say, as a user, I install dnf5 in parallel with dnf, will I be able to "dnf install foo" and then "dnf5 uninstall foo"? For those two things I wrote above, if in the end dnf5 will be renamed back as dnf to be a drop in replacement, wouldn't be better to have dnf5 obsolete dnf starting from now? I don't think anyone is going to test it on a production machine anyway... Mattia _______________________________________________ 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, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
