dnf versus yum

Reindl Harald h.reindl at thelounge.net
Thu Jan 2 22:43:31 UTC 2014

Am 02.01.2014 23:29, schrieb Martin Langhoff:
> On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Reindl Harald <h.reindl at thelounge.net> wrote:
>> with my software-developer hat on the opposite is true
> I discussed yum internals quite a bit with Seth in past years. Every
> change I proposed met a wall of backwards compatibility. Turns out
> that there are many very specific corner cases, and yum has it on its
> shoulders to not mess with them.

that's the difference of a change between a complete rewrite having the
supported end-product with it'fs features in mind

> AIUI, the yum team has refactored quite a bit in place, and that's
> what you seem to be referring to.

i did not speak about refactoring

i spoke about a complete rewrite as it happens but with not start
with a limited feature set to make things easier at the start and
finally end at the same problems some years later

> dnf is a chance to drop some of that backwards compat and move forward

and where does throw away existing code while start from scratch
means that you need to throw away features and bahvior too instead
only get rid of the old codebase?

> Users (usually corporate) that have a rigid need of the old
> behavior can continue to use yum for as it is maintained; and it is
> likely that RH would keep it maintained for a long time.

which does say nothing about Fedora

> I expect yum to continue to live as the backwards compat tool, even as
> dnf takes center stage.

maybe, maybe not
sysvinit was also in the F15 repos and not use/installable

> Please respect that others may have knowledge and experience that you
> don't, you are coming across as rather argumentative

please respect that you know not much about my knowledge

i maintain a large-codebase which started long before Fedora existed
for some hundret instances and did rewrites of many components over
the last 10 years without taking the enduser notice

it takes more time, but the result have few to no compromises and at
no point in time any existing user was disappointed

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 246 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20140102/1cf10503/attachment.sig>

More information about the devel mailing list