Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

will it be ready by F29? or are would it be best to look at pulling it into F30 instead ? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

On Thu, 2018-01-18 at 16:15 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > > Even if it does, it should have been advertised as a system-wide change > > for F28 which is no longer possible. > > FESCo could approve an exception. > > If this really makes package updates made through

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

Existing code has a serious performance problem with package uninstallation on bigger installations (a lot of transactions or a lot of packages in the system) interfering with the system upgrade. Moreover, database scheme has significantly changed - that would require another, relatively complex

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:15 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: >> Even if it does, it should have been advertised as a system-wide change >> for F28 which is no longer possible. > > FESCo could approve an exception. > > If this really makes package

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote: > Even if it does, it should have been advertised as a system-wide change > for F28 which is no longer possible. FESCo could approve an exception. If this really makes package updates made through PackageKit show up in DNF history, IMHO, it would be worth considering

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

On Wed, Jan 17, 2018 at 11:50:53PM -, Greg Evenden wrote: > ohh okz. i guess the real questrion is, will DNF3 be usable before Branching > point? Even if it does, it should have been advertised as a system-wide change for F28 which is no longer possible. So F29 it is :) Pierre

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

ohh okz. i guess the real questrion is, will DNF3 be usable before Branching point? ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

On Wed, 2018-01-17 at 23:08 +, Greg Evenden wrote: > igor as long as DNF3 is working/stable before Beta Freeze im sure > DNF3 can still make it into F28, Christ, no. DNF's behaviour has consequences just about *everywhere* you look in the distro. A major new DNF release needs to be landed

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

igor as long as DNF3 is working/stable before Beta Freeze im sure DNF3 can still make it into F28, however there does need to be a system-wide change made for it for f28 IMO ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Wed, 2018-01-17 at 09:33 +, Eduard Cuba wrote: > Hello, > > SWDB is in DNF upstream since October 19. However, it's not released yet > and it's being reworked due to changes in database design and performance > issues. Also, the

Re: Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

Hello, SWDB is in DNF upstream since October 19. However, it's not released yet and it's being reworked due to changes in database design and performance issues. Also, the GObject-introspection bindings are being dropped and replaced by C++ API with SWIG bindings to match long-term libdnf

Status of SWDB (Unified database for DNF)

Hi, does anybody know what the current status of: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unified_database_for_DNF is? It obviously did not make Fedora 27, so: * is this still being worked on? * when can we expect it in production in Fedora? It is quite sad that PackageKit operations still don't