|
From: | Adam Porter |
Subject: | bug#62750: 29.0.50; Commands 'package-update' and 'package-update-all' should be called '*-upgrade' |
Date: | Mon, 24 Apr 2023 12:28:18 -0500 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0 |
On 4/24/23 07:02, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Me, I have only one potential issue: since "update" just means "delete the installed version, then install another version", it could be easily made to downgrade, not just to upgrade. So if we ever would like to allow downgrading, the new names will get in the way. But if this is not an issue we should be bothered about, it's fine by me.
IMHO, a command to downgrade ought to be a separate command with a different name--not only to reduce confusion, but because downgrading packages is an operation that is more likely to require manual user intervention, such as recompiling other packages that depend on the downgraded package (e.g. if struct or macro definitions change, or symbols disappear).
It's easy enough to cause that problem when upgrading, and much more likely when downgrading, to the extent that it's arguable that a command to downgrade shouldn't exist, because users who want to downgrade a package should be prepared to deal with the potential fallout.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |