F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF

Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos nmav at redhat.com
Fri Jun 13 13:36:41 UTC 2014

On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 14:53 +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:

> > 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?
> No, there is not. But I think you misunderstood the reason, although not by 
> much. The fact is that dnf *is* different project than yum, let's not try to 
> mask it. The vast majority of code base is different (> 85% for sure), its 
> architecture is different, the community is different, the entire nature of the 
> project is different. And the fact that its CLI interface tries to be as 
> compatible as possible with yum doesn't change any of this.

I understand that you want to rename the project to show that it is a
new thing, but do users of yum really care about these facts? Do as a
user you really care if bind 9 was a total rewrite of bind 8? I believe
you overestimate how much users of software care about the inner

> That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is that renaming this 
> project to yum will do nothing else than to confuse its users, as they will 
> think this is still yum and they should expect from dnf it what they expected 
> from yum.

I again think you overestimate what users think of software. They don't
think of yum as a particular code-base. Yum is the tool, like hammer is
the tool. If you replace a hammer by a new redesigned hammer, it is
still a hammer even if not 100% identical.


More information about the devel mailing list