RetroSearch Browse

Fri Jul 18 04:37:32 CEST 2008 · http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081362.html

On Thu, Jul 17, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Fred Drake <fdrake at acm.org> wrote:
> On Jul 17, 2008, at 7:27 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
>>
>> bsddb is in a very bad shape, as the 2.6 code hasn't been merged into
>> 3k. I somewhat doubt that this gets resolved before the release, so
>> bsddb users might need to skip 3.0.
>
>
> In fact, bsddb as packages in core Python has rarely been in good shape.
>
> Has anyone actually considered that bsddb might do better if maintained
> strictly as an external package?  That would make it easier for the any
> maintainers to release updates, and removes a source of frustration for
> users who either don't need it or would rather wait for a happier version.
>
> I think this is worth considering.  I vaguely recall that the bsddb module
> was maintained before it was incorporated into the core Python release.

+1. In my recollection maintaining bsddb has been nothing but trouble
right from the start when we were all sitting together at "Zope Corp
North" in a rented office in McLean... We can remove it from 3.0. We
can't really remove it from 2.6, but we can certainly start
end-of-lifing it in 2.6.

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-July/081362.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-3000] No beta2 tonight