On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 10:16:41AM +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 10:15, schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 12 June 2014 16:54, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
DNF is a fork of YUM and pretends to be compatible
and if it finally replaces YUM it's just a new
generation of
On 16. 6. 2014 at 19:49:35, Peter Oliver wrote:
On 16 June 2014 08:31, Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
On 13. 6. 2014 at 10:09:07, Chuck Anderson wrote:
So I propose we keep calling the project DNF and the package dnf, but
start the transition to a generic command name for the tool
On 17. 6. 2014 at 07:27:23, Tim Lauridsen wrote:
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Zing z...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Does yum have current developers/maintainers? If so, actually obsoleting
yum seems kind of rude to me. If that's the case why not just leave yum
as is? Those that want to use
fpm (fedora package manager). Flows nicely off the keyboard too
I'd agree that dnf is perhaps not the best name in the world, always makes
me think 'did not finish' which isn't good really.
Jon
On 17 Jun 2014 08:07, Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
On 16. 6. 2014 at 19:49:35, Peter
On 17. 6. 2014 at 08:13:18, Jon Kent wrote:
fpm (fedora package manager). Flows nicely off the keyboard too
Unfortunately this is not an option, the tool will also be in RHEL and all its
derivatives.
Thanks
Jan
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
- Original Message -
From: Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com
To: devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2014 9:07:39 AM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Replace Yum With DNF
On 16. 6. 2014 at 19:49:35, Peter Oliver wrote:
On 16 June 2014 08:31, Jan Zelený jzel
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:07 AM, Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
Any other suggestions then? Cause `pkg` would be my #1 choice.
rum: {Redhat,RPM} Updater, Modified
rup: {Redhat,RPM} UPdater
packagectl
Rich
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:07:39 +0200
Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
Any other suggestions then? Cause `pkg` would be my #1 choice.
Personally, I think adding another name just adds another problem.
kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
devel mailing list
On 17.06.2014 09:13, Jon Kent wrote:
fpm (fedora package manager). Flows nicely off the keyboard too
fedora package manager aka fpm in EL8? :)
So for a couple of years here we go again.
BTW yum never finished one are based on the actual package manager - rpm.
man 8 yum
yum is an
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:46 AM, poma pomidorabelis...@gmail.com wrote:
fedora package manager aka fpm in EL8? :)
So for a couple of years here we go again.
BTW yum never finished one are based on the actual package manager -
rpm.
man 8 yum
yum is an interactive, rpm based, package
Am 17.06.2014 17:54, schrieb Jerry James:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 3:46 AM, poma pomidorabelis...@gmail.com wrote:
fedora package manager aka fpm in EL8? :)
So for a couple of years here we go again.
BTW yum never finished one are based on the actual package manager -
rpm.
man 8 yum
yum
On 06/11/2014 08:20 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
The transition period is one reason why we want to keep the name dnf.
We'd basically like to keep current yum around for users that have
various scripts and stuff depending on it so they have some time to
migrate to dnf. Also presenting dnf as a
On 6/17/2014 12:50 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 06/11/2014 08:20 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
The transition period is one reason why we want to keep the name dnf.
We'd basically like to keep current yum around for users that have
various scripts and stuff depending on it so they have some time to
Once upon a time, David dgbo...@gmail.com said:
Excuse me. By now I doubt anyone but the Yum zealots really care. Just
do it. Make the switch. The Yum zealots will find something else to
complain about later. Perhaps the size of the default font? :-)
Please do not call people that like
Am 17.06.2014 19:26, schrieb David:
On 6/17/2014 12:50 PM, Luya Tshimbalanga wrote:
On 06/11/2014 08:20 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
The transition period is one reason why we want to keep the name dnf.
We'd basically like to keep current yum around for users that have
various scripts and stuff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/17/2014 1:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.06.2014 19:26, schrieb David:
before you call others zealots you should ask yourself if you
are just only a ordinary user with his single machine or have to
manage *a lot* of machines, some of
Hi
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:11 PM, David wrote:
You completely missed my point. The Fedora Devs have been working on
this. The Fedora Devs want to do this. The Fedora Devs have said that
they are going to do this. And when. Which means? You, and others, are
going to have to deal with
Am 17.06.2014 20:11, schrieb David:
On 6/17/2014 1:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.06.2014 19:26, schrieb David:
before you call others zealots you should ask yourself if you
are just only a ordinary user with his single machine or have to
manage *a lot* of machines, some of them even
On 6/17/2014 2:17 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Hi
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 2:11 PM, David wrote:
You completely missed my point. The Fedora Devs have been working on
this. The Fedora Devs want to do this. The Fedora Devs have said that
they are going to do this. And when.
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:03:20 -0600
Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:07:39 +0200
Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
Any other suggestions then? Cause `pkg` would be my #1 choice.
Personally, I think adding another name just adds another problem.
kevin
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 08:52:34 -0400
Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 02:44:10PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
* package 'dnf-yum-compat-command' is installed by default. It
obsoletes Yum and provides its own
Am 17.06.2014 21:36, schrieb Stijn Hoop:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 08:03:20 -0600
Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com wrote:
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 09:07:39 +0200
Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
Any other suggestions then? Cause `pkg` would be my #1 choice.
Personally, I think adding another name
On 17 June 2014 19:11, David dgbo...@gmail.com wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 6/17/2014 1:59 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 17.06.2014 19:26, schrieb David:
before you call others zealots you should ask yourself if you
are just only a ordinary user with his single
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 02:40:45PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 08:52:34 -0400
Matthew Miller mat...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 02:44:10PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
* package
On Tue, 2014-06-17 at 16:37 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 02:40:45PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
I am not away of any work to make mock use dnf. dnf will
need to be able to make mock chroots going all the way back to rhel5
since we use mock in the buildsystem and we
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Tue, 17 Jun 2014 16:37:32 -0400
Peter Jones pjo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 02:40:45PM -0500, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 08:52:34 -0400
Matthew Miller
On 06/17/2014 09:40 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote:
I am not away of any work to make mock use dnf.
As part of GSoC Michael Simacek is working on improving mock. Among
other features, DNF support is already implemented and working. More
information can be found on his blog [1] (part of Fedora
On 14. 6. 2014 at 12:18:07, Jon Kent wrote:
Hi,
Been monitoring this debate and if nothing else this seems to point out
that the reasoning for dnf, as opposed to fixing/rewriting yum haven't been
laid out very well. I'm on yum side of the fence as I don't see that the
reasoning so far is
On 13. 6. 2014 at 10:09:07, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 09:38:40AM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
On 12. 6. 2014 at 10:54:45, DJ Delorie wrote:
Nothing will change for you, the yum command will still exist for a
few more Fedora releases,
Which only postpones the
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 09:31:17AM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
On 13. 6. 2014 at 10:09:07, Chuck Anderson wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 09:38:40AM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
On 12. 6. 2014 at 10:54:45, DJ Delorie wrote:
Nothing will change for you, the yum command will still exist for a
On 16 June 2014 08:31, Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com wrote:
On 13. 6. 2014 at 10:09:07, Chuck Anderson wrote:
So I propose we keep calling the project DNF and the package dnf, but
start the transition to a generic command name for the tool that
installs, removes, and updates packages. I
On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 14:44:10 +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
* package 'dnf-yum-compat-command' is installed by default. It
obsoletes Yum and provides its own code/usr/bin/yum/code, a short
Does yum have current developers/maintainers? If so, actually obsoleting
yum seems kind of rude to me.
On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Zing z...@fastmail.fm wrote:
Does yum have current developers/maintainers? If so, actually obsoleting
yum seems kind of rude to me. If that's the case why not just leave yum
as is? Those that want to use yum use yum and dnf use dnf.
I don't know the
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 8:40 AM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Depends obscure options that are hardly used by the majority of users
are different from common options that everyone uses.
dnf remove yum dnf kernel ruins your system
yum don't allow that for good reasons
that's
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Björn Persson
bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se wrote:
Please keep the command name yum, and keep the command line syntax
and the configuration language as compatible as is feasible. Make a
wrapper or a symlink if you need to, but plan to keep it forever, not
just for
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Björn Persson
bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se wrote:
As a system administrator I expect yum install, yum remove and
yum update to continue to work, and I expect to not have to rename
or edit /etc/yum.conf after an upgrade. I'm sure I'm far
On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 2:18 PM, Björn Persson
bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se wrote:
Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Björn Persson
bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se wrote:
As a system administrator I expect yum install, yum remove and
yum update to continue to work, and I
Come on, every thing in Fedora changes all the time, It is hard for me to
see the fuzz about
having to type 'dnf install foobar', instead of 'yum install foobar'
If you uses a tool like yum at the command line, you should be able to
handle that.
more novice users will use gui tool and don't
Am 14.06.2014 10:05, schrieb Tim Lauridsen:
Come on, every thing in Fedora changes all the time, It is hard for me to see
the fuzz about
having to type 'dnf install foobar', instead of 'yum install foobar'
If you uses a tool like yum at the command line, you should be able to handle
that.
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 04:00 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:42, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:33 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
So maybe you should propose to have dnf named yum 4.0, and then since
that's a major version, we would be ok to change
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:55 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:36, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Everybody I know who looked at the yum python api told me it was a bit
horrible. So a cleanup was needed for that. There was demand from
packagekit developers to have a cleaner API
Am 14.06.2014 12:26, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 04:00 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:42, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:33 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
So maybe you should propose to have dnf named yum 4.0, and then since
that's
Hi,
Been monitoring this debate and if nothing else this seems to point out
that the reasoning for dnf, as opposed to fixing/rewriting yum haven't been
laid out very well. I'm on yum side of the fence as I don't see that the
reasoning so far is been put forward very well for moving to dnf, and
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 17:14, schrieb drago01:
But we should not stop progress because what we have works ... we
don't work on Fedora to
keep things as is we want to improve what we have. (Just to be clear
again that has
Am 14.06.2014 14:31, schrieb drago01:
And recently there is even a trend where people (and the press)
complains lack of change == lack of innovation ... that does not
mean that we should do changes for the sake of doing changes but we
should not be afraid of doing so either.
the same sort of
Concerns me greatly when someone thinks cli is the wrong way to automate
things. Agree Reindl comment 're this statement.
On 14 Jun 2014 13:41, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 14.06.2014 14:31, schrieb drago01:
And recently there is even a trend where people (and the press)
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 13:45 +0100, Jon Kent a écrit :
Concerns me greatly when someone thinks cli is the wrong way to
automate things. Agree Reindl comment 're this statement.
CLI is not scalable, you need to fork processes for that. There is also
no way to communicate errors to the
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 12:55 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 12:26, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 04:00 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:42, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:33 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
So maybe
Am 14.06.2014 14:56, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 13:45 +0100, Jon Kent a écrit :
Concerns me greatly when someone thinks cli is the wrong way to
automate things. Agree Reindl comment 're this statement.
CLI is not scalable, you need to fork processes for that. There
Am 14.06.2014 15:04, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 12:55 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
That's why the developers do ask what is missing. That's also why I
ask for you what compatibility you exactly want, and you keep avoiding
giving a clear answer
*full* compatibility
Le 14/06/2014 15:15, Reindl Harald a écrit :
stop that trolling
Weren't you the one trolling here ? Because that's what many people are
thinking about this thread.
Don't you think that turning every discussion on DNF into a flame war is
helpful or serves your purpose ? Even the ones where
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 15:08 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 14:56, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 13:45 +0100, Jon Kent a écrit :
Concerns me greatly when someone thinks cli is the wrong way to
automate things. Agree Reindl comment 're this statement.
Am 14.06.2014 15:48, schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
Le 14/06/2014 15:15, Reindl Harald a écrit :
stop that trolling
Weren't you the one trolling here? Because that's what many people are
thinking about this thread.
backed by what data?
Don't you think that turning every discussion on DNF into
Am 14.06.2014 15:49, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 15:08 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 14:56, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 13:45 +0100, Jon Kent a écrit :
Concerns me greatly when someone thinks cli is the wrong way to
automate things.
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 15:15 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 15:04, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 12:55 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
That's why the developers do ask what is missing. That's also why I
ask for you what compatibility you exactly want,
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 2:40 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
you can rename internal functions, move code, use different
libraries all day long, but if it comes to command lines and
user interfaces (CLI params are a user interface) you need
always to be very careful
Depends
Le 14/06/2014 15:59, Reindl Harald a écrit :
backed by what data?
Based on various contributors feedbacks.
don't you think if after i made clear my point of view a handful
people starting quibbling is the real reason for become a flamewar?
Let's say that's the case, are you compelled to
Am 14.06.2014 16:39, schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
Le 14/06/2014 15:59, Reindl Harald a écrit :
what eactly is broken in the CLI?
I'll chose an example you care about: protected packages.
You pretend that DNF maintainers refused to support that, but actually, the
answer is that they think it
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 14.06.2014 16:39, schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
Le 14/06/2014 15:59, Reindl Harald a écrit :
[...]
* dd's job is to write raw data
* the package managers job is help to maintain a machine
and ruin it
No its not ;)
On Fri, 13 Jun 2014 09:15:11 +0100, Richard Hughes wrote:
On 12 June 2014 16:54, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
DNF is a fork of YUM and pretends to be compatible
and if it finally replaces YUM it's just a new
generation of YUM
Just do a side-by-side comparison of the code
Am 14.06.2014 17:26, schrieb drago01:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 14.06.2014 16:39, schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
Le 14/06/2014 15:59, Reindl Harald a écrit :
[...]
* dd's job is to write raw data
* the package managers job is help to maintain a
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 14.06.2014 17:26, schrieb drago01:
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 4:56 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 14.06.2014 16:39, schrieb Haïkel Guémar:
Le 14/06/2014 15:59, Reindl Harald a écrit :
[...]
*
Please keep the command name yum, and keep the command line syntax
and the configuration language as compatible as is feasible. Make a
wrapper or a symlink if you need to, but plan to keep it forever, not
just for a year or two.
So Yum has been made faster? That's wonderful news, it was certainly
I have a script I wrote that we've been using for years to manage large
number of servers using yum to manage rpm install/upgrades etc via ssh from
management server. So long as that usecase is covered still, ie dnf can be
scripted around with sane exit codes, than I'm a happy bunny. From what
On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:56 PM, Björn Persson bj...@xn--rombobjrn-67a.se
wrote:
Please keep the command name yum, and keep the command line syntax
and the configuration language as compatible as is feasible. Make a
wrapper or a symlink if you need to, but plan to keep it forever, not
just
On 12. 6. 2014 at 10:54:45, DJ Delorie wrote:
Nothing will change for you, the yum command will still exist for a
few more Fedora releases,
Which only postpones the problem.
just as the `service` command that was superseded by systemctl like
5 releases of Fedora ago exists.
Which
On 12. 6. 2014 at 11:41:52, Simo Sorce wrote:
On Thu, 2014-06-12 at 17:13 +0200, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
2014-06-12 17:03 GMT+02:00 Rahul Sundaram methe...@gmail.com:
On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 10:29 AM, Jan Zelený wrote:
We are on the same page, thanks for your input.
I don't think
Am 13.06.2014 10:01, schrieb Jan Zelený:
On 12. 6. 2014 at 11:41:52, Simo Sorce wrote:
We can keep the yum symlink forever...
Definitely, we do no insist on removing it. I am perfectly fine with removing
it
some time far in the future when nobody uses it any more
one said forever, i am
On 12. 6. 2014 at 16:16:13, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
2014-06-12 9:30 GMT+02:00 Jan Zelený jzel...@redhat.com:
It boils down to this: someone is going to be inconvenienced. I argue
it's better to inconvenience the minority with special 'yum' needs by
making them use the 'yum-old' alias,
On 12 June 2014 16:54, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
DNF is a fork of YUM and pretends to be compatible
and if it finally replaces YUM it's just a new
generation of YUM
Just do a side-by-side comparison of the code bases. Calling dnf yum
would be a lie indeed.
Richard.
--
devel
Am 13.06.2014 10:15, schrieb Richard Hughes:
On 12 June 2014 16:54, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
DNF is a fork of YUM and pretends to be compatible
and if it finally replaces YUM it's just a new
generation of YUM
Just do a side-by-side comparison of the code bases. Calling
Am 13.06.2014 10:13, schrieb Jan Zelený:
On 12. 6. 2014 at 16:16:13, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
… *now*, but *will be inconvenienced later* after those “a few more
releases” when you are planning for the yum command to go away.
The total breakage and total impact on users is the same, you are
On 13. 6. 2014 at 10:09:48, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 10:01, schrieb Jan Zelený:
On 12. 6. 2014 at 11:41:52, Simo Sorce wrote:
We can keep the yum symlink forever...
Definitely, we do no insist on removing it. I am perfectly fine with
removing it some time far in the future
2014-06-13 10:20 GMT+02:00 Jan Zelený jzel...@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
On 13. 6. 2014 at 11:36:25, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
2014-06-13 10:20 GMT+02:00 Jan Zelený jzel...@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
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
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. They
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
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
On 13.6.2014 14:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
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
Am 13.06.2014 15:03, schrieb drago01:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
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
On Fri, 2014-06-13 at 15:15 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 15:03, schrieb drago01:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is that renaming
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.
Hi
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Simo Sorce wrote:
I think you are failing to understand the concept of perspective.
I think there is a difference in perspectives rather than lack of
understanding. You are looking at it from a developer perspective -
their project, let them do whatever
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 09:38:40AM +0200, Jan Zelený wrote:
On 12. 6. 2014 at 10:54:45, DJ Delorie wrote:
Nothing will change for you, the yum command will still exist for a
few more Fedora releases,
Which only postpones the problem.
just as the `service` command that was
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
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
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is
Am 13.06.2014 16:49, schrieb drago01:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
the user expects that anyways if you replace something he
did not
On 06/13/2014 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald wrote:
well, hopefully it does not fit the same way if it needs to drive
offside a nice road in context of software: stability
i am tired hear people talking about milliseconds of boot-performance
and what update tool is slightly faster here and there
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 16:49, schrieb drago01:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Steve Clark scl...@netwolves.com wrote:
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald
Am 13.06.2014 17:14, schrieb drago01:
But we should not stop progress because what we have works ... we
don't work on Fedora to
keep things as is we want to improve what we have. (Just to be clear
again that has nothing to do with the *name* of the things we
just should not live in the
If you have any other suggestions other than keeping the name, we
will be open to consider them.
My suggestion is to keep the name, but as you're not open to that
option, there's no point in me bothering, is there?
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 10:39 -0400, Steve Clark a écrit :
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is that
Am 14.06.2014 02:59, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 10:39 -0400, Steve Clark a écrit :
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
That being said, the
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 15:07 +0200, Petr Spacek a écrit :
On 13.6.2014 14:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
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,
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:03 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 02:59, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 10:39 -0400, Steve Clark a écrit :
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM, Reindl Harald h.rei...@thelounge.net
wrote:
Am 14.06.2014 03:04, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 15:07 +0200, Petr Spacek a écrit :
On 13.6.2014 14:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
That being said, the reason for not renaming dnf to yum is that renaming
this
project to yum will
Am 14.06.2014 03:10, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:03 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 02:59, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 10:39 -0400, Steve Clark a écrit :
On 06/13/2014 09:03 AM, drago01 wrote:
On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 2:58 PM,
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:10 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:04, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 15:07 +0200, Petr Spacek a écrit :
On 13.6.2014 14:58, Reindl Harald wrote:
Am 13.06.2014 14:53, schrieb Jan Zelený:
That being said, the reason for not
Am 14.06.2014 03:24, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:10 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Like they complained when up2date was replaced by yum ?
when zipper replaced whatever they used to have on *suse before ?
When pkgin replaced pkg_add on some of the BSD ?
It happened
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:20 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:10, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:03 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 02:59, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le vendredi 13 juin 2014 à 10:39 -0400, Steve Clark a écrit :
On
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:33 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
Am 14.06.2014 03:24, schrieb Michael Scherer:
Le samedi 14 juin 2014 à 03:10 +0200, Reindl Harald a écrit :
and that changes where much bigger than a fork of YUM renamed
for no good reason especially in context of replace it
1 - 100 of 157 matches
Mail list logo
