F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF
mitr at volny.cz
Fri Jun 13 09:36:25 UTC 2014
2014-06-13 10:20 GMT+02:00 Jan Zelený <jzeleny at redhat.com>:
> On 13. 6. 2014 at 10:09:48, Reindl Harald wrote:
> > Am 13.06.2014 10:01, schrieb Jan Zelený:
> i have not heard any valid reason to call a software DNF instead just
> > the next major version of YUM which is millions of times mentioned
> > and well known everywhere - *forget* DNF as name - you won't revert
> > the fact that everybody translates it to "Did Not Finish" beause
> > it has no senseful meaning and so finally you can call it "yum-ng"
> > and in the history ng-replacements did not change binary names
> I have explained the reason on multiple occasions. If you volunteer to do
> bug cleanup regularly and to explain users on daily basis that dnf is
> different from yum and they should not consider changes in behavior
> regressions, I will think about this some more (no promises). But fair
> warning, this effort will cost you about an hour of your time every single
So not wanting users to complain about “yum” no longer having some features
is the only reason for dropping the yum name I have seen in this thread
(also called “setting expectations”); have I missed other reasons?
If this is *the* reason, and you simultaneously propose to *keep* the “yum”
name for the forseeable future, i.e. for the *entire time users are likely
to complain*, how do you expect to get the benefit? AFAICS those bugs will
get filed and will have to be handled, so “setting expectations” will not
help your team’s workload at all.
What am I missing?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the devel