On Mon, 7 Oct 2002, Todd Lyons wrote: > David Guntner wrote on Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 08:33:02PM -0700 : > > > I was wondering about that myself. Thanks for the information, I'll > > give that a try. But I definitely agree with Toshiro; it's a major > > step *backwards*. The rpmdrake that comes with 9.0 is amazingly > > Instead of a seperately written program hooking into both urpm and rpm > libs, there is anow a series of programs hooking into the urpm libs. > Simpler to maintain and better compatibility. It is indeed a step > forward from the programmer side of things. From the user side of > things, it could be perceived as a step backwards. Once you learn the > different methods and get used to it, you'll realize that it is a much > better and more stable product.
Is the end-user's convenience less important than the programmer's? Who is the product being developed for, anyway? Although the new version is pretty, and I appreciate that it's easier for the programmer, I too think it's a step backward in functionality for the actual user. I might change my mind, but so far I *don't* think it's a better product. Dale Huckeby
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
