On Thu, 2008-03-27 at 09:55 +0100, Ronald Warsow wrote: > Richard Hally wrote: > > Holy smoke! Batman that packagekit is lame. It's not ready for prime > > time yet. > > The first two minutes and I have a list of things wrong. Where to start: > > 1. No help. > > 2. under the "groups" tab, the list of groups is disorganized. > do see something in this tab ? > I get an message box saying: > "No packages cache is available. > Yum cache was invalid and has been rebuilt." > I asked this course I want to fill a bz today, but if you see something > more then me, I'm not sure what to fill. File that against PackageKit - the backend bits are responsible for maintaining the package cache etc. > > number 5 is a real usability problem. > > I cannot understand how people are thinking this is ready to be the > > default s/w management app. > > +1 > That's what I was asking myself yesterday also, when I investigated the > above problem a little bit deeper. You can make the argument that PackageKit is not ready all you want - I've made the same argument myself. But it's irrelevant. pup and pirut are basically unmaintained now. FESCo has considered the issue and decided to go with PackageKit as the default. So the only way to make sure PackageKit *is* ready to be the default package manager is to test it, file bugs, and get the maintainers to *improve* it. Complaining on -test-list but *refusing* to report bugs improves *nothing*. It's the lazy way out and it's a waste of your time and mine. Either test and report bugs, or quietly stick with pup and pirut. For more help reporting PK bugs, see: http://packagekit.org/pk-bugs.html -w
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-test-list mailing list fedora-test-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-test-list
