dnf versus yum

Michael Scherer misc at zarb.org
Thu Jan 2 21:36:13 UTC 2014


Le jeudi 02 janvier 2014 à 16:08 -0500, Rahul Sundaram a écrit :
>   Hi
> 
> 
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 3:52 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
>         This one is clearly one of those "doomed to repeat history"
>         things in
>         motion.
>         
>         Protected packages was first implemented * as a yum plugin
>         because Seth
>         thought it was kind of crazy and shouldn't be core
>         functionality, but then
>         it proved itself in real use and became built-in. Now, the DNF
>         pages says
>         "Similar functionality can be implemented by a plugin",
>         putting us right
>         back where we were. **
> 
> 
> Pretty much, yeah. I remember trying to convince Seth to merge the
> functionality and got pretty similar replies to what I hear from Ales
> now.  Similar issues at
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1044984  and
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1044984.  I really dislike
> going through the same process twice.  Pushing such functionality out
> into plugins won't work well either because by the time users realize
> that such a plugin exists and they might need them, it is likely to be
> too late and if you discard existing features without understanding
> the use cases fully, you will end up creating a rough transition for
> users. If someone is going to replace  A with B, it would be nice for
> the developers involved to go through the release history and bugs and
> find out why the current functionality was done the way it was before
> deciding to change it.   

It could be implemented as a plugin and still installed by default.

-- 
Michael Scherer



More information about the devel mailing list