-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On Sun, 2017-07-16 at 13:27 +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 02:17:47PM +0200, Jaroslav Reznik wrote: > > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Unified database for DNF = > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unified_database_for_DNF > > > > Change owner(s): > > * Eduard Čuba <ec...@redhat.com> > > * Igor Gnatenko <ignate...@redhat.com> > > > > Replacing obsoleted YUM/DNF databases (yumdb, historydb, > > groups.json) > > with new unified sqlite database adapted to the current needs of > > DNF. > > > > == Detailed Description == > > Using single unified database with shared interface enhances data > > integrity, safety and performance of package managers in Fedora. > > Database is easily expandable for new features (Modularity support > > in > > DNF will use SWDB). > > That change affects the core functionality of the system, but the > description is missing some useful details that'll help evaluate the > impact for people who are not intimately involved in dnf and > packagekit: > > - Some details about which databases are replaced (e.g. paths in > filesystem to the db), and details where the new database is so > people > can introspect this change more easily. Actually, everything under /var/lib/dnf > > - Does "enhances data integrity, safety" really mean that dnf and > packagekit will show the same history and provenience of packages? > (Or was the old db unsafe?) Both > > - Any numbers of the performance part? Eduard should know > > - Are new deps required in dnf or packagekit? Are any removed? libsqlite3.so, but since it has been required by python (which is used by dnf) and directly by PackageKit is not a problem > > - Will selinux changes be required? Not expected > > > == Scope == > > > > * Proposal owners: Port DNF to SWDB (patches has been already > > sent), > > Link? https://github.com/rpm-software-management/dnf/pull/785 https://github.com/rpm-software-management/libdnf/pull/199 > > > Port PackageKit to SWDB > > Link to WIP patches? Probably only locally on > > Incidentally, that GSOC page has a lot of interesting details, but it > talks about F24, so it's unclear if all of it is up to date, and > anyway > I think this should all be part of the change page, not buried in > links.
Thanks a lot for reading carefully and asking such questions. I will make sure that all details will be added to Change Page 😉 > > Zbyszek > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org - -- - -Igor Gnatenko -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEhLFO09aHZVqO+CM6aVcUvRu8X0wFAllshOwACgkQaVcUvRu8 X0zYLw//ZDALaHDpqGQgaYSs3UyMvJ+ApfYi6qvAgiRg1g4JP3WmTNu7O5cdkCo2 8DTRPGhXE3zjr9FgwPEZL6vInn1U87Qzjr80mTBqKcGBofJPY79eBg5L5RT63ibr UtFOTqSslAZGz3raPnxTqb1ARTqzpU+J0y8Ec2zBTo4d6fPOd6Mqhzo4nt/6MpRx fNkZZdXvZvSy4568b3YqaMz5/kMjc7oYMp7vqQscI0LwlLkQVdYt19ugKfZ9X3TW VQqvOJj6ofKyLGMwlhOraTDoHuMY0/q1Ns1baSsbySE9vGFGBZCPIUhTApQ2/LAM eh4iDR8ktc+vwSEdgxwnkY5d2jRS4CkZE1OUr1OtJqcpc228y1vbjaYstUBdr3QQ Dwzdu5dLBKAfTBU8SYKfUuFcb+ek2NCXDi+ONYliF4WTZfVJB093CZyfHHRWOCZe kfHumITw6zmQ72paHt0yaTECUK76qn0avZ3FESH9JVNWOWh11eER1zhQV2cO5Q3W ZebrD0FvnkRpL24O9iReFKR1iLw1u6csMqkG4EdrC9xh7PDXI/UdJrGh+eRc64Oj Lz5C92VG9Jin9beCWWUpN1yJvYKp7Us0WhejjyWU3Odqt4G2V2jZGfczwnfDO4vZ fv+eRkEM/mhTPCe70y3s+v+MkeAD5ATKmrFQ9wvxtZuWG1yBr/4= =HyGR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
