Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Randy Barlow]

On 06/27/2018 06:18 AM, Lubomír Sedlář wrote:
> Removing Yyum would mean that there will no longer be /usr/bin/pungi
> available in Fedora.

This would affect bodhi-server too.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZTMIFCZZ5L6M6LYD4F5GFTHWUXLVPGAE/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM Tom Hughes  wrote:
>
> On 12/07/18 09:15, Daniel Mach wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi  > > wrote:
> >
> > koji is kinda important. I think this is meaning python2-koji?
> > I would hope python3-koji/koji stays around?
> >
> > ditto
>
> I believe koji is only in the list because it has a require
> on createrepo which (a) it doesn't really need as it can be
> configured to use createrepo_c instead and (b) won't be a
> problem once createrepo_c provides createrepo which I thought
> was supposed to be happening?
>

Koji contains an embedded copy of mergerepos from createrepo, which
does depend on YUM, and this can be ignored by telling Koji to use
createrepo_c. But it also uses YUM for repomd parsing and multilib
handling for creating dist-repos. These two functions need to be
ported, or otherwise Koji will effectively be broken in Fedora.

And dist-repos are important, since Fedora RISC-V and a number of
external Koji deployments use them.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/U2YYU4QKYUICUW2WMBNIFOJVZRKWA2L3/

Re: Koji (was: Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 07/14/2018 09:14 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:15:38AM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
>>> koji
>>>
>>> koji is kinda important. I think this is meaning python2-koji?
>>> I would hope python3-koji/koji stays around?
>>>
>> ditto
> 
> I don't understand, will Koji still work or not?

My understanding (and I hope koji developers/maintainers will jump in if
I am wrong here) is that koji as client should work fine. koji as
server/hub still needs work to no longer need yum.

See: https://pagure.io/koji/issue/971

> I was told (I don't know for sure) that this change will break Koji.
> We're using Koji on top of Fedora 29 to build Fedora/RISC-V.
>
> We'd love to use dnf instead of yum of course, but it seems like Koji
> uses a bunch of yum APIs, rather than just using the yum command line
> tool,so I've no idea how much work it's going to be to fix that.

Yeah, Fedora Infrastructure's koji instances are rhel, so they should
hopefully keep working. Unfortunately, I see from the above ticket that
this also affects kojid, which is going to hit us. ;(

So yeah, it would be very nice to have that fixed up before we drop yum.

kevin



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/YRM4TVMP3PEU6WRCSOBRXDKISBE6X2FQ/

Koji (was: Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3)

[Richard W.M. Jones]

On Thu, Jul 12, 2018 at 10:15:38AM +0200, Daniel Mach wrote:
> > koji
> >
> > koji is kinda important. I think this is meaning python2-koji?
> > I would hope python3-koji/koji stays around?
> >
> ditto

I don't understand, will Koji still work or not?

I was told (I don't know for sure) that this change will break Koji.
We're using Koji on top of Fedora 29 to build Fedora/RISC-V.

We'd love to use dnf instead of yum of course, but it seems like Koji
uses a bunch of yum APIs, rather than just using the yum command line
tool,so I've no idea how much work it's going to be to fix that.

Rich.

-- 
Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat http://people.redhat.com/~rjones
Read my programming and virtualization blog: http://rwmj.wordpress.com
virt-builder quickly builds VMs from scratch
http://libguestfs.org/virt-builder.1.html
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BNTY2R7DVC3MWHHFDQDZN25CYA6WXQPD/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 07/12/2018 01:15 AM, Daniel Mach wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi  wrote:
> 
>> On 06/27/2018 03:18 AM, Lubomír Sedlář wrote:
>>> Removing Yyum would mean that there will no longer be /usr/bin/pungi
>>> available in Fedora. This is not a problem for any work done by release
>>> engineering, but it is still used by people creating spins.
>>>
>>> So this is a call to action: if anyone wants to continue using it, now
>>> is the time to come up and port it to DNF (and Python 3).
>>
>> Sorry for my delay in replying here... been busy. ;(
>>
>> Looking at the list of things that would go away (from the wiki page):
>>
>> cobbler
>> ddiskit
>> diskimage-builder
>> dlrn
>> dnf-plugins-core
>>
>> ? dnf-plugins-core is kind of important, is this a false positive?
>> Or does it mean python2-dnf-plugin*?
>>
> Yes, it's python2-dnf-plugin-migrate.
> The list I provided contains packages from koji/dist-git/bugzilla
> perspective (srpm names).

ok. Makes sense.

...snip...
>> If the critical packages don't get ported in time, we can postpone
> removing yum to the next release.
> I think the hard deadline is when Python 2 gets removed from the distro
> (depending on Python 2 indicates
> that some packages are not Python 3 ready yet).

ok. Based on what I know now I think we can do it, but we really need
mock bootstapping to work and koji to have a way to use it for epel
builds before we switch builders to f29.

kevin





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/OLLYKVRPQ7YWFBP5SOTOURVS32UFRAQB/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Tom Hughes]

On 12/07/18 09:15, Daniel Mach wrote:

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi > wrote:


koji is kinda important. I think this is meaning python2-koji?
I would hope python3-koji/koji stays around?

ditto


I believe koji is only in the list because it has a require
on createrepo which (a) it doesn't really need as it can be
configured to use createrepo_c instead and (b) won't be a
problem once createrepo_c provides createrepo which I thought
was supposed to be happening?

Tom

--
Tom Hughes (t...@compton.nu)
http://compton.nu/
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/AN2ZQYQN6PKCKORU2JT7M4EUKLDBTNTR/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Daniel Mach]

On Thu, Jul 5, 2018 at 9:45 PM, Kevin Fenzi  wrote:

> On 06/27/2018 03:18 AM, Lubomír Sedlář wrote:
> > Removing Yyum would mean that there will no longer be /usr/bin/pungi
> > available in Fedora. This is not a problem for any work done by release
> > engineering, but it is still used by people creating spins.
> >
> > So this is a call to action: if anyone wants to continue using it, now
> > is the time to come up and port it to DNF (and Python 3).
>
> Sorry for my delay in replying here... been busy. ;(
>
> Looking at the list of things that would go away (from the wiki page):
>
> cobbler
> ddiskit
> diskimage-builder
> dlrn
> dnf-plugins-core
>
> ? dnf-plugins-core is kind of important, is this a false positive?
> Or does it mean python2-dnf-plugin*?
>
Yes, it's python2-dnf-plugin-migrate.
The list I provided contains packages from koji/dist-git/bugzilla
perspective (srpm names).

>
> fusioninventory-agent
> grinder
> imgbased
> kiwi
> koji
>
> koji is kinda important. I think this is meaning python2-koji?
> I would hope python3-koji/koji stays around?
>
ditto

>
> koji-containerbuild
>
> We like containers these days, don't we?
>
> libtaskotron
>
> And testing?
>
> lpf
> mach
> mash
> mirrormanager
>
> And mirrors (this one isn't as important as we run mirrormanager on
> rhel, but still)
>
> nagios-plugins-check-updates
> osc
> perl-Fedora-Rebuild
> plague
> pulp-rpm
> repo_manager
> repoview
> retrace-server
>
> This also runs on rhel, but sooner or later will need porting.
>
> rpm-ostree-toolbox
> sigul
>
> This is kinda important.
>
> snake
> system-config-kickstart
> yum-axelget
> yum-rhn-plugin
> yum-updatesd
>
> So, I'm personally not too keen on this at this point. I suppose if it
> happens then we will need to maintain/keep a fork of yum3 in
> infrastructure for tools, at which point it might be best to just keep
> it in the distro.
>
> I don't know the porting plans for all the above stuff, but I would
> personally really prefer retiring only after they were ported or at
> least we know there's a plan for them.
>
> If the critical packages don't get ported in time, we can postpone
removing yum to the next release.
I think the hard deadline is when Python 2 gets removed from the distro
(depending on Python 2 indicates
that some packages are not Python 3 ready yet).


> kevin
>
>
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.
> fedoraproject.org/message/4ANJI5BPX2RYPNXNGJKGHQCXIYRUKIKS/
>
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4Z7BY6GDP4BN4V5NRUPXD5FOGUVWYY5U/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Kevin Fenzi]

On 06/27/2018 03:18 AM, Lubomír Sedlář wrote:
> Removing Yyum would mean that there will no longer be /usr/bin/pungi
> available in Fedora. This is not a problem for any work done by release
> engineering, but it is still used by people creating spins.
> 
> So this is a call to action: if anyone wants to continue using it, now
> is the time to come up and port it to DNF (and Python 3).

Sorry for my delay in replying here... been busy. ;(

Looking at the list of things that would go away (from the wiki page):

cobbler
ddiskit
diskimage-builder
dlrn
dnf-plugins-core

? dnf-plugins-core is kind of important, is this a false positive?
Or does it mean python2-dnf-plugin*?

fusioninventory-agent
grinder
imgbased
kiwi
koji

koji is kinda important. I think this is meaning python2-koji?
I would hope python3-koji/koji stays around?

koji-containerbuild

We like containers these days, don't we?

libtaskotron

And testing?

lpf
mach
mash
mirrormanager

And mirrors (this one isn't as important as we run mirrormanager on
rhel, but still)

nagios-plugins-check-updates
osc
perl-Fedora-Rebuild
plague
pulp-rpm
repo_manager
repoview
retrace-server

This also runs on rhel, but sooner or later will need porting.

rpm-ostree-toolbox
sigul

This is kinda important.

snake
system-config-kickstart
yum-axelget
yum-rhn-plugin
yum-updatesd

So, I'm personally not too keen on this at this point. I suppose if it
happens then we will need to maintain/keep a fork of yum3 in
infrastructure for tools, at which point it might be best to just keep
it in the distro.

I don't know the porting plans for all the above stuff, but I would
personally really prefer retiring only after they were ported or at
least we know there's a plan for them.

kevin



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/4ANJI5BPX2RYPNXNGJKGHQCXIYRUKIKS/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 04:25:16PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:54:07PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> > > IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next 
> > > release.
> > > Should the change be called differently?
> > Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
> > releases already.
> 
> How about "Replace Yum 3 with Yum 4, powered by DNF"? This would bring
> us in line with what's happening in the Enterprise Linux space.

I'd prefer to replace "powered by" with some simple non-ambiguous wording.
"powered by" might mean that yum calls dnf under the hood, or some
other complicated relationship. "YUM4/DNF" can be used to underline that
they are the same thing.

What about just calling the change "Fully replace yum3 with dnf / yum4"
and having a sentence like "DNF and YUM4 are the same thing" ?

Zbyszek
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/U4VXTW5DXA73DXTRNAV4T7RHWF66OMS2/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Gerald B. Cox]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 10:37 PM, Tomasz Torcz  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 05:49:39PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:37:07PM -0700, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
> > > If we're keeping both commands, I don't really care - but to make
> > > sure I'm understanding this, we're proposing to eliminate the yum
> > > code, create a symlink for yum pointing to dnf and then change our
> > > documentation to no longer reference dnf - only reference yum?
> >
> > That's my suggestion, although "no longer reference dnf" is a bit
> > strong. We'd use `yum` as the standard command in documentation about
> > package management, but detailed documentation would talk about "yum
> > powered by dnf".
>
>   After half a decade of using dnf? It's aready ingrained in my muscle
> memory and some of my ansible scripts.  Flipping the name of most
> important command every few years is really counter-productive, yum→dnf
> transition was painful enough. I'm against inflicting such self-harm
> again.
>

If you read the above, the DNF code isn't being changed or replaced.  It
will
still be there and in fact, YUM will only be a symlink pointing to DNF.
That does
raise the question though of what will happen when you enter:  yum --help
or man
yum.  Since we're using "powered by DNF", I would assume it would still
reference DNF.

I believe in a round about way, they are just saying that they don't want
to change
all the documentation that references YUM.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/XIG6UDTFEWI5VPQMAHAFTI3IHEKAN77R/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Tomasz Torcz]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 05:49:39PM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:37:07PM -0700, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
> > If we're keeping both commands, I don't really care - but to make
> > sure I'm understanding this, we're proposing to eliminate the yum
> > code, create a symlink for yum pointing to dnf and then change our
> > documentation to no longer reference dnf - only reference yum?
> 
> That's my suggestion, although "no longer reference dnf" is a bit
> strong. We'd use `yum` as the standard command in documentation about
> package management, but detailed documentation would talk about "yum
> powered by dnf".

  After half a decade of using dnf? It's aready ingrained in my muscle
memory and some of my ansible scripts.  Flipping the name of most
important command every few years is really counter-productive, yum→dnf
transition was painful enough. I'm against inflicting such self-harm
again.

-- 
Tomasz TorczThere exists no separation between gods and men:
xmpp: zdzich...@chrome.pl   one blends softly casual into the other.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/ZK5U46K7N5SBG45YW4ZQ4JZLWZLIVZGO/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:37:07PM -0700, Gerald B. Cox wrote:
> If we're keeping both commands, I don't really care - but to make
> sure I'm understanding this, we're proposing to eliminate the yum
> code, create a symlink for yum pointing to dnf and then change our
> documentation to no longer reference dnf - only reference yum?

That's my suggestion, although "no longer reference dnf" is a bit
strong. We'd use `yum` as the standard command in documentation about
package management, but detailed documentation would talk about "yum
powered by dnf".





-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/P5HCL3L2C7ACWXUFD27THEKJ6WLUTRY5/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Gerald B. Cox]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:17 PM, Matthew Miller 
wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 03:45:06PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> > To tie two recent devel list threads, this is a perfect use case for
> > a ~/bin being first in PATH: a ~/bin/yum -> /bin/dnf symlink for
> > those that don't want to rewrite scripts.
>
> As I understand it, regardless of which one we decide to document and
> market as primary, the plan is for the package to include that symlink
> and for both commands to just work identically.
>
> If we're keeping both commands, I don't really care - but to make sure I'm
understanding this,
we're proposing to eliminate the yum code, create a symlink for yum
pointing to dnf and then
change our documentation to no longer reference dnf - only reference yum?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IDWJKPX636VAUBFJUHZMNGZBDCSWFXPW/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 03:45:06PM -0400, Przemek Klosowski wrote:
> To tie two recent devel list threads, this is a perfect use case for
> a ~/bin being first in PATH: a ~/bin/yum -> /bin/dnf symlink for
> those that don't want to rewrite scripts.

As I understand it, regardless of which one we decide to document and
market as primary, the plan is for the package to include that symlink
and for both commands to just work identically.

-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/B454OYKORMUFY4WBFI4FCSG465F7ZJYX/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Kalev Lember]

On 06/28/2018 08:51 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 01:29:41PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:

But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".


When FESCo decided to approve that change to the original plan, this
was noted as a potential risk. I personally think that staying aligned
with the rest of the RH distro ecosystem is worth some inconvenience.
It'll make it easier to share and collaborate on documentation and
other help.


I am no longer on FESCo, but I strongly support Matthew's message here,
for what it's worth.

--
Kalev
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/Q3EC3EAR6MVSZIN236J45RGOBWQRNQS5/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Przemek Klosowski]

On 06/28/2018 03:34 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:

To answer the ecosystem question... if I were an EL shop that had been
using yum and writing scripts to interact with yum for years, and then
I had to rewrite all of my scripts and retrain my muscle memory to
call a new command that had similar semantics and compatibility, I'd
be pretty annoyed.  Having dnf in CentOS 7 is a way to help users that
use both Fedora and EL avoid that problem, which is good.


To tie two recent devel list threads, this is a perfect use case for a 
~/bin being first in PATH: a ~/bin/yum -> /bin/dnf symlink for those 
that don't want to rewrite scripts.


For the record, I was against introducing dnf as a separate command---I 
thought (and still think) that it should be yum v.3 (or whatever next 
major version was due at that time). Having said that, once the decision 
has been made, I just got on with it, even though I use a mix of Fedora 
and EL/RHEL so I have to remember which is which and use both yum and 
dnf commands.


___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PRRKRKUKXJ5YHA2KHLZ4R4RQFIRR6I55/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 3:24 PM Gerald B. Cox  wrote:
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Neal Gompa  wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:51 PM Matthew Miller  
>> wrote:
>>
>> > When FESCo decided to approve that change to the original plan, this
>> > was noted as a potential risk. I personally think that staying aligned
>> > with the rest of the RH distro ecosystem is worth some inconvenience.
>> > It'll make it easier to share and collaborate on documentation and
>> > other help.
>> >
>
>
> Aren't we talking about YUM being a symlink to DNF?  If that is the case, I 
> don't believe
> staying "aligned" is going to be easier - since it is indeed DNF and not YUM. 
>   I was under the impression
> this was a rebranding; and that ship has sailed years ago.  Which also begs 
> the question, why isn't
> the rest of the RH distro ecosystem using DNF?

The cool thing about sailing ships on a globe is that it's a sphere
and you can keep going and still wind up back where you started :)

To answer the ecosystem question... if I were an EL shop that had been
using yum and writing scripts to interact with yum for years, and then
I had to rewrite all of my scripts and retrain my muscle memory to
call a new command that had similar semantics and compatibility, I'd
be pretty annoyed.  Having dnf in CentOS 7 is a way to help users that
use both Fedora and EL avoid that problem, which is good.

>> The irony is not lost on me that a big part of the reason DNF has been
>> adopted in other Linux distributions is because it's not called YUM
>> and wasn't attached to the stigma of that name, and after having that
>> happen, there's now people in RH/Fedora who want to rename DNF to YUM.
>>
>
> I'm not aware of that being a big part of the reason, but I am aware of the 
> negative connotation that YUM
> has had in the past... and the rebranding effort helped mitigate that.  I 
> don't understand why people appear
> to have some sort of emotional connection to the name YUM. DNF has been 
> around since 2013... 5 years later
> and we're discussing changing the name?

Yep.  Sometimes we don't consider all angles or get feedback that
negates decisions.  That's what's awesome about open source.  It
allows you to experiment, correct, and adapt, all in the public space.

josh
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WGINJGOLANM7EUOCVYK6FBDJU43CLLTB/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Gerald B. Cox]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 11:54 AM, Neal Gompa  wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:51 PM Matthew Miller 
> wrote:
>
> > When FESCo decided to approve that change to the original plan, this
> > was noted as a potential risk. I personally think that staying aligned
> > with the rest of the RH distro ecosystem is worth some inconvenience.
> > It'll make it easier to share and collaborate on documentation and
> > other help.
> >
>

Aren't we talking about YUM being a symlink to DNF?  If that is the case, I
don't believe
staying "aligned" is going to be easier - since it is indeed DNF and not
YUM.   I was under the impression
this was a rebranding; and that ship has sailed years ago.  Which also begs
the question, why isn't
the rest of the RH distro ecosystem using DNF?


>
> The irony is not lost on me that a big part of the reason DNF has been
> adopted in other Linux distributions is because it's not called YUM
> and wasn't attached to the stigma of that name, and after having that
> happen, there's now people in RH/Fedora who want to rename DNF to YUM.
>
>
I'm not aware of that being a big part of the reason, but I am aware of the
negative connotation that YUM
has had in the past... and the rebranding effort helped mitigate that.  I
don't understand why people appear
to have some sort of emotional connection to the name YUM. DNF has been
around since 2013... 5 years later
and we're discussing changing the name?
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/CAMID3UW5KZP3KTPQVOYVGTUTRJDKY57/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 02:54:05PM -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
> > When FESCo decided to approve that change to the original plan, this
> > was noted as a potential risk. I personally think that staying aligned
> > with the rest of the RH distro ecosystem is worth some inconvenience.
> > It'll make it easier to share and collaborate on documentation and
> > other help.
> The irony is not lost on me that a big part of the reason DNF has been
> adopted in other Linux distributions is because it's not called YUM
> and wasn't attached to the stigma of that name, and after having that
> happen, there's now people in RH/Fedora who want to rename DNF to YUM.

Well, here, we never had that stigma. :)


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/JHG2ZNE4V65J4NQTC7CM6S7REBFDYP3W/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 2:51 PM Matthew Miller  wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 01:29:41PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
> > is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
> > rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
> > back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".
>
> When FESCo decided to approve that change to the original plan, this
> was noted as a potential risk. I personally think that staying aligned
> with the rest of the RH distro ecosystem is worth some inconvenience.
> It'll make it easier to share and collaborate on documentation and
> other help.
>

The irony is not lost on me that a big part of the reason DNF has been
adopted in other Linux distributions is because it's not called YUM
and wasn't attached to the stigma of that name, and after having that
happen, there's now people in RH/Fedora who want to rename DNF to YUM.


--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BENZGPKFNOVQGQGIXKWTRY57QYEFKQZJ/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 01:29:41PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
> is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
> rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
> back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".

When FESCo decided to approve that change to the original plan, this
was noted as a potential risk. I personally think that staying aligned
with the rest of the RH distro ecosystem is worth some inconvenience.
It'll make it easier to share and collaborate on documentation and
other help.



-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/WN23XKJEDEQOSMWS4JJECU4KSF6NRLTA/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Ken Dreyer]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 7:16 AM, Daniel Mach  wrote:

> DNF shouldn't diverge from YUM just "because we can".
> We're fixing some obvious differences that weren't introduced for any good
> reason.
>
> There will be no special compat layer just a yum -> dnf symlink.
> If the compatibility is preserved to sufficient level, we believe it's a
> better
> option than to have 2 executables with different behavior.

I think this is a great plan. Thank you for explaining it here.

I also like Matt's idea of re-titling the change "Replace Yum 3 with
Yum 4, powered by DNF"? I think it would help bring publicity to
what's going on with Yum in Fedora.

- Ken
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LZ6DAL66VRHQNHLMN76OFTDJIRZSMMEX/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Daniel Mach]

On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 1:35 AM, Adam Williamson  wrote:

> On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 18:18 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 4:30 PM Adam Williamson
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 16:25 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:54:07PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> > > > > > IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some
> next release.
> > > > > > Should the change be called differently?
> > > > >
> > > > > Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
> > > > > releases already.
> > > >
> > > > How about "Replace Yum 3 with Yum 4, powered by DNF"? This would
> bring
> > > > us in line with what's happening in the Enterprise Linux space.
> > > >
> > > > (See
> > > > https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/
> ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4)
> > >
> > > But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
> > > is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
> > > rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
> > > back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".
> >
> > It's still dnf.  In fact, I believe /usr/bin/dnf would even still
> > exist.  However, dnf has come significantly closer to yum
> > functionality since it was first introduced and reuniting isn't a bad
> > idea.
> >
> > I understand where you're coming from, but I think we should take the
> > opportunity to correct now.  We (and I do mean we as someone that
> > pushed for not calling it yum) had valid reasons to separate it in the
> > past, but those reasons are becoming increasingly invalid.  Sticking
> > with the dnf name is going to become a forced split going forward for
> > little benefit.  I'm happy to eat my own words and say we should
> > probably focus around a single package manager name at this point.
> >
> > > It's different from the EL situation because EL never really had the
> > > "dnf is the new thing" phase. If you're going from EL 7 to The Next EL
> > > you're just going from yum 3 to "yum 4".
> >
> > Yeah, but if you play in both spaces continuing to call it "dnf" in
> > Fedora and "yum4" in EL is forcing a mental break that doesn't really
> > need to be there.
>
> So I may have missed the latest shiny plans here - I thought the plan
> was that dnf would provide a 'yum' CLI command which was as close as
> possible to compatible with yum 3, but *also* provide a 'dnf' CLI
> command which was more like the 'current' dnf CLI in Fedora. Is that
> still the case? Or is there just going to be one true CLI command now?
>
> DNF shouldn't diverge from YUM just "because we can".
We're fixing some obvious differences that weren't introduced for any good
reason.

There will be no special compat layer just a yum -> dnf symlink.
If the compatibility is preserved to sufficient level, we believe it's a
better
option than to have 2 executables with different behavior.

The long-term priority is to make DNF command-line interface and behavior
consistent
and in such cases, DNF must diverge from YUM3 behavior and insisting on 100%
compatibility would block usability improvements and evolution in general.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BLKXTF4K3WZPM2ZHHDAWTBKJIMMUXXG3/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Daniel Mach]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 2:23 PM, Sam Varshavchik 
wrote:

> Jan Kurik writes:
>
> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3
>>
>>
>> Owner(s):
>>   * Daniel Mach 
>>
>>
>> Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
>>
>>
>> == Detailed description ==
>> Remove packages from the distribution:
>> * createrepo
>>
>
> We should have createrepo_c install a symlink, and have an "Obsoletes:
> createrepo" so that this gets taken care of by a normal upgrade.
>
> Yes, we'll provide compat Provides and symlinks to createrepo_c and yum so
many command line users won't see any big difference.
I've updated the document with the 'Compatibility' section.
Thanks!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/NMLNEFKAJKPCER5KDS45SORDFYF4V2AT/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 27.6.2018 v 13:44 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> So is it actually possible to use DNF to prepare bootstrap buildroot
> containing YUM from RHEL and then the buildroot itself being managed by
> YUM? Last time I tried to come up with setup like this I failed
> (rhbz#1467314) ...

Right. Still not possible. I thought that with the config option bootstrap_* we 
are done, but I just tested it and I
still get en error. :(

Miroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/SQLQEHCGXN44PEZUZFGW3M3LUVRXF3Q2/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 28.6.2018 v 02:00 Kevin Kofler napsal(a):
> How about changing the default config to use DNF instead? Last I checked, 
> the tenor was that it should work and that you just prefer using YUM 3 to 
> ensure the results are the same as when running mock on an EL machine, but 
> if YUM 3 is not available anymore, wouldn't using DNF work?

This is definitely possible. Just add
  config_opts['package_manager'] = 'dnf'
And it will work. Kind of. If you are ok with using different depsolver.

E.g., if you have in spec
  BuildRequires: webserver
And yum always picked httpd, dnf can pick nginx. Or vice versa. The code is 
different.

Miroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UCDMPGXJHICZFU3T4QPVBPIAGCT6OQKT/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Kevin Kofler]

Miroslav Suchý wrote:
> Yes, YUM is required. Technically it is "Suggests: yum" on Fedoras.

How about changing the default config to use DNF instead? Last I checked, 
the tenor was that it should work and that you just prefer using YUM 3 to 
ensure the results are the same as when running mock on an EL machine, but 
if YUM 3 is not available anymore, wouldn't using DNF work?

Bootstrap is a pretty heavyweight solution.

Kevin Kofler
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/6GX2HHWZA3D5HJZSV57T5JEIQIBEIRWM/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 18:18 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 4:30 PM Adam Williamson
>  wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 16:25 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:54:07PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> > > > > IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next 
> > > > > release.
> > > > > Should the change be called differently?
> > > > 
> > > > Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
> > > > releases already.
> > > 
> > > How about "Replace Yum 3 with Yum 4, powered by DNF"? This would bring
> > > us in line with what's happening in the Enterprise Linux space.
> > > 
> > > (See
> > > https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4)
> > 
> > But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
> > is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
> > rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
> > back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".
> 
> It's still dnf.  In fact, I believe /usr/bin/dnf would even still
> exist.  However, dnf has come significantly closer to yum
> functionality since it was first introduced and reuniting isn't a bad
> idea.
> 
> I understand where you're coming from, but I think we should take the
> opportunity to correct now.  We (and I do mean we as someone that
> pushed for not calling it yum) had valid reasons to separate it in the
> past, but those reasons are becoming increasingly invalid.  Sticking
> with the dnf name is going to become a forced split going forward for
> little benefit.  I'm happy to eat my own words and say we should
> probably focus around a single package manager name at this point.
> 
> > It's different from the EL situation because EL never really had the
> > "dnf is the new thing" phase. If you're going from EL 7 to The Next EL
> > you're just going from yum 3 to "yum 4".
> 
> Yeah, but if you play in both spaces continuing to call it "dnf" in
> Fedora and "yum4" in EL is forcing a mental break that doesn't really
> need to be there.

So I may have missed the latest shiny plans here - I thought the plan
was that dnf would provide a 'yum' CLI command which was as close as
possible to compatible with yum 3, but *also* provide a 'dnf' CLI
command which was more like the 'current' dnf CLI in Fedora. Is that
still the case? Or is there just going to be one true CLI command now?
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/DVXOIG7NLV2U5SKOWPWYFBWUTCU4AKK7/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Josh Boyer]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 4:30 PM Adam Williamson
 wrote:
>
> On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 16:25 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:54:07PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> > > > IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next 
> > > > release.
> > > > Should the change be called differently?
> > >
> > > Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
> > > releases already.
> >
> > How about "Replace Yum 3 with Yum 4, powered by DNF"? This would bring
> > us in line with what's happening in the Enterprise Linux space.
> >
> > (See
> > https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4)
>
> But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
> is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
> rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
> back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".

It's still dnf.  In fact, I believe /usr/bin/dnf would even still
exist.  However, dnf has come significantly closer to yum
functionality since it was first introduced and reuniting isn't a bad
idea.

I understand where you're coming from, but I think we should take the
opportunity to correct now.  We (and I do mean we as someone that
pushed for not calling it yum) had valid reasons to separate it in the
past, but those reasons are becoming increasingly invalid.  Sticking
with the dnf name is going to become a forced split going forward for
little benefit.  I'm happy to eat my own words and say we should
probably focus around a single package manager name at this point.

> It's different from the EL situation because EL never really had the
> "dnf is the new thing" phase. If you're going from EL 7 to The Next EL
> you're just going from yum 3 to "yum 4".

Yeah, but if you play in both spaces continuing to call it "dnf" in
Fedora and "yum4" in EL is forcing a mental break that doesn't really
need to be there.

josh
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/X445HR5HYOGMR5XNX7O3FT4CRJBE4TPT/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2018-06-27 at 16:25 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:54:07PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> > > IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next 
> > > release.
> > > Should the change be called differently?
> > 
> > Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
> > releases already.
> 
> How about "Replace Yum 3 with Yum 4, powered by DNF"? This would bring
> us in line with what's happening in the Enterprise Linux space.
> 
> (See
> https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4)

But in Fedora land, we've spent several years selling the message "yum
is gone and replaced with this new thing called dnf". It would be
rather confusing to suddenly start selling the message "oh hey yum is
back only now it's sort of dnf but sort of not dnf".

It's different from the EL situation because EL never really had the
"dnf is the new thing" phase. If you're going from EL 7 to The Next EL
you're just going from yum 3 to "yum 4".
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PQJL44FE6COGDYCDUXJMTTQQPVDZORDP/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Matthew Miller]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 02:54:07PM +0200, Björn Persson wrote:
> > IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next release.
> > Should the change be called differently?
> Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
> releases already.

How about "Replace Yum 3 with Yum 4, powered by DNF"? This would bring
us in line with what's happening in the Enterprise Linux space.

(See
https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/ConfigManagementSIG/YUM4)


-- 
Matthew Miller

Fedora Project Leader
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BFTY3ODYDLWPM4D3GBJL2Y57HHTWGAHE/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Björn Persson]

Miro Hrončok  wrote:
> On 27.6.2018 11:52, Jan Kurik wrote:
> > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3
> > 
> > 
> > Owner(s):
> >* Daniel Mach 
> > 
> > 
> > Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
> > 
> > 
> > == Detailed description ==
> > Remove packages from the distribution  
> 
> IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next release.
> 
> Should the change be called differently?

Especially since Yum has been called "yum-deprecated" for several
releases already.

Björn Persson


pgpsmJQOJFpjx.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signatur
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/B43IJSL4L2FVCWVSRI2ONSN5SMI4OENA/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Neal Gompa]

On Wed, Jun 27, 2018 at 8:24 AM Sam Varshavchik  wrote:
>
> Jan Kurik writes:
>
> > = Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3
> >
> >
> > Owner(s):
> >   * Daniel Mach 
> >
> >
> > Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
> >
> >
> > == Detailed description ==
> > Remove packages from the distribution:
> > * createrepo
>
> We should have createrepo_c install a symlink, and have an "Obsoletes:
> createrepo" so that this gets taken care of by a normal upgrade.
>

It should probably do Obsoletes+Provides, so that future requests for
createrepo install createrepo_c.



-- 
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/H3WWRB6NVZQZDFGN5YWP3G5YPGZ2LVST/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Sam Varshavchik]

Jan Kurik writes:


= Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3


Owner(s):
  * Daniel Mach 


Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.


== Detailed description ==
Remove packages from the distribution:
* createrepo


We should have createrepo_c install a symlink, and have an "Obsoletes:  
createrepo" so that this gets taken care of by a normal upgrade.




pgpOH2nAk5K5Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UEJSKUBEKIQNZWDQWDKSL5RQ5RV7ZLX5/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 27.6.2018 v 13:06 Miroslav Suchý napsal(a):
> Dne 27.6.2018 v 12:14 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>> Isn't yum required to build {RH,EP}EL{6,7} packages using Mock?
>> Actually, the Mock "bootstrap" feature could be used to fetch YUM from
>> {RH,EP}EL using DNF, but I am not sure it can be configured like this 
> Yes, YUM is required. Technically it is "Suggests: yum" on Fedoras. Bootstrap 
> is the solution, however this feature has
> some issues (and therefore not enabled by default yet).

So is it actually possible to use DNF to prepare bootstrap buildroot
containing YUM from RHEL and then the buildroot itself being managed by
YUM? Last time I tried to come up with setup like this I failed
(rhbz#1467314) ...

V.


> Most people can use bootstrap without problem, but it actually depends on 
> your use case and your configuration.
>
> Miroslav
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UBNTWWTXIZ4AIU265YQVHTCGACHJFHVO/

___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/PPFUDU2D5WYN6L5YUTHGEDDRAKSN42RW/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Miroslav Suchý]

Dne 27.6.2018 v 12:14 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> Isn't yum required to build {RH,EP}EL{6,7} packages using Mock?
> Actually, the Mock "bootstrap" feature could be used to fetch YUM from
> {RH,EP}EL using DNF, but I am not sure it can be configured like this 

Yes, YUM is required. Technically it is "Suggests: yum" on Fedoras. Bootstrap 
is the solution, however this feature has
some issues (and therefore not enabled by default yet).
Most people can use bootstrap without problem, but it actually depends on your 
use case and your configuration.

Miroslav
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/UBNTWWTXIZ4AIU265YQVHTCGACHJFHVO/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Lubomír Sedlář]

Removing Yyum would mean that there will no longer be /usr/bin/pungi
available in Fedora. This is not a problem for any work done by release
engineering, but it is still used by people creating spins.

So this is a call to action: if anyone wants to continue using it, now
is the time to come up and port it to DNF (and Python 3).

Jan Kurik píše v St 27. 06. 2018 v 11:52 +0200:
> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3
> 
> 
> Owner(s):
>   * Daniel Mach 
> 
> 
> Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.
> 
> 
> == Detailed description ==
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> * createrepo
> * yum
> * yum-langpacks
> * yum-utils,
> * yum-metadata-parser
> * python-urlgrabber
> All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
> them should be migrated to DNF.
> 
> 
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners:
> Remove packages from the distribution: createrepo, yum, yum-
> langpacks,
> yum-utils, yum-metadata-parser, python-urlgrabber
> 
> * Other developers:
> Either remove packages from the distribution or switch them to DNF
> 
> * Release engineering:
> #7588 [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7588]
> 
> ** List of deliverables:
> N/A (not a System Wide Change)
> 
> * Policies and guidelines:
> N/A
> 
> * Trademark approval:
> N/A (not needed for this Change)
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/MCEDURNDXUATEZUPX4ZMIHINAWQFEAVW/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 27.6.2018 v 11:52 Jan Kurik napsal(a):
> = Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3
>
>
> Owner(s):
>   * Daniel Mach 
>
>
> Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.

Isn't yum required to build {RH,EP}EL{6,7} packages using Mock?
Actually, the Mock "bootstrap" feature could be used to fetch YUM from
{RH,EP}EL using DNF, but I am not sure it can be configured like this 

V.


>
>
> == Detailed description ==
> Remove packages from the distribution:
> * createrepo
> * yum
> * yum-langpacks
> * yum-utils,
> * yum-metadata-parser
> * python-urlgrabber
> All these packages should no longer be used and all software using
> them should be migrated to DNF.
>
>
> == Scope ==
> * Proposal owners:
> Remove packages from the distribution: createrepo, yum, yum-langpacks,
> yum-utils, yum-metadata-parser, python-urlgrabber
>
> * Other developers:
> Either remove packages from the distribution or switch them to DNF
>
> * Release engineering:
> #7588 [https://pagure.io/releng/issue/7588]
>
> ** List of deliverables:
> N/A (not a System Wide Change)
>
> * Policies and guidelines:
> N/A
>
> * Trademark approval:
> N/A (not needed for this Change)
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/IMKV4K7LE6AOWTGB5U6WC44QF7AXXY6J/

Re: F29 Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3

[Miro Hrončok]

On 27.6.2018 11:52, Jan Kurik wrote:

= Proposed Self Contained Change: Deprecate YUM 3 =
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Deprecate_YUM_3


Owner(s):
   * Daniel Mach 


Remove yum (v3) and all related packages from Fedora.


== Detailed description ==
Remove packages from the distribution


IMHO deprecate != remove, but rather mark for removal in some next release.

Should the change be called differently?


--
Miro Hrončok
--
Phone: +420777974800
IRC: mhroncok
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/2GFFWOS6NI4PPYU37UFEZI2HTWZHBQLE/