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 - is that so hard to understand and why?
So basically, you want "full compatibility forever". Then I guess you
cannot say that nobody ask for that, since you just did.
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2014-June/199991.html
stop that trolling
"to maintain yum in the long term" is a completly different thing than
keep *full compatibility* - compatibility is independet from the YUM
code itself
Yet, I still do not see you offering any help to achieve that, only
you
requiring it.
as you do not offering to do the work of re-view and adopt
any existing script and howto out there
>> Yes. And I would be in favor personally, so that let
developers free to
>> change the interface and anything if they see fit without having to keep
>> old code for the old interface.
>
> why do you need to keep old code for compatible CLI interfaces?
Because that's the easiest way, especially for plugins.
interesting - guess what: the *easiest way* would have been
not rewrite YUM at all - do it anyways but than say "but
for all other things which don't match the cherry picking
it's easier not do to so" is hypocrisy
Otherwise, any changes could result in unrelated side effects and
regressions, and the more options you provides, the more stuff there is
to break. And the QA cost of full compatibility is rather high,
especially for python where there isn't much isolation or interface for
the code ( ie, you can directly go to the internal structures, kinda
like DOS years ago )
you understand that any compatibility break is a side effect for the user?