On 27. 1. 2015 at 11:29:43, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Tue, Jan 27, 2015 at 11:25 AM, Stephen John Smoogen
<smooge(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> On 27 January 2015 at 10:15, Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, I might be asking a completely stupid question here...
>>
>> Why move production stuff over to dnf at all? Isn't dnf's goal in life
to
>> eventually become yum? If dnf is "good enough" to start using it in
>> production, should the discussion be around dnf -> yum transition?
>
> I think that was dropped a long time ago. dnf isn't going to become yum in
> some sort of rename. It will be a seperate command and while its syntax
> will be similar it is not 100% (eg you won't be able to use a yum plugin
> to
> work with dnf)
Ahh, I hadn't seen that. Well, since the name is no longer temporary I
would like to say that it's a terrible name :)
:-)
FYI:
http://dnf.baseurl.org/2014/03/12/on-the-name/
Jan