Also, consider cases where repository priorities are in use; a lower-priority repo that's unreachable may cause unexpected/damaging results for the administrator in cases where there's a package version mismatch.
(This is actually a real case for me: in an environment I work in, a lower-priority repository contains packages which supersede their counterparts in higher-priority repositories, occasionally at lower version numbers. A transient error here could potentially cause the installation of higher-version RPMs from the higher-priority repository; once the error was corrected, a downgrade would have to be manually kicked off.) I'd strongly urge you to consider the side-effects of this change. On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 3:06 PM, James Antill <ja...@fedoraproject.org>wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 15:26 +0200, Ales Kozumplik wrote: > > Hello, > > > > I've pushed new DNF version to F19 [1] and Rawhide today. There's only > > little changes but the default value for repos' skip_if_unavailable has > > changed and is enabled now. This is because recently an ailing Dropbox > > repo has made many fine DNF processes end too soon for no good reason > [3]. > > > Again I would caution you against just blindly changing defaults to be > incompatible with yum ... even if the yum defaults are bad, every > incompatibility incurs a cost for all users (and it will exist as long > as yum and dnf are being used ... so like 10 years from now). At worst > speak with Zdenek about changing yum's defaults in future Fedora > versions, although even that's still going to be a problem for most > users. > > > In this case there's a reason skip_if_unavailable defaults to off, with > it on by default most of the package managers output is vastly more > suspect due to having no assurance about which repos. were actually used > to do the operation. And this is 100 worse for any code that does things > like "repo. X can't have packages that exist in repo. Y" > > Also a lot of errors become "silent" errors (so things are slow and > don't work well instead of explicitly saying: foo repo. is broken). > Indeed are the dropbox repos. likely to be broken, or would someone fix > them if they knew? Should users have them disabled by default and only > use --enablerepo occasionally? Should they not be implemented as a > direct repo. at all? > > -- > devel mailing list > devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct -- Ed Marshall <e...@logic.net> Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas. http://esm.logic.net/
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
