On Oct 20, 2004, at 13:05, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: > Gerhard Haering wrote: >> Hi python-dev-elopers, >> Last December, we had a short thread discussing the integration of >> PySQLite into Python 2.4. At the time, I was against inclusion, >> because I thought PySQLite was not ripe for it, mostly because I >> thought the API was not stable. >> [...] > > >> I think that a simple embedded relational database would be a good >> thing to have in Python by default. And as Python 2.5 won't happen >> anytime soon, there's plenty of time for developing it, getting it >> stable, and integrating it. > > SQLite is a gem and PySQLite works great, but I don't see why we > should start adding third-party tools of this size (>38k LOC C code) > to the standard Python distribution. I don't think he ever said that the SQLite source tree should go into Python. By default can mean that Python builds a SQLite wrapper if SQLite is available, just like it does for bsddb, readline, etc. Binary builds for Win32 and Mac should of course ship with a copy of SQLite for use by the PySQLite extension (w/ a dll or just statically linked in). Heck, Mac OS X 10.4 will be shipping with SQLite anyway <http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/unix.html>! > Perhaps you we should consider adding only the Python interface > and then ship a DLL with the Windows installer like we do for > expat and the Sleepycat DBM ?! Python includes expat, doesn't it? -bob
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4