> What do people think about including bsddb3 in Python 2.3, along with > deprecating the existing bsddb module? You'll find the package at > > http://pybsddb.sourceforge.net/ > > It would come as a bsddb3 package, which acts interface-compatible > with the current bsddb module. Various submodules give access to more > advanced features. > > The main rationale for dropping bsddb is that it still relies on the > db_185.h interface, which will be phased out sooner or > later. Existance of this interface, in turn, results in problems with > anydbm: > > There are multiple versions of the database files available in the > world, and any BSDDB installation can only handle so many of these > versions. Now, on Linux, it is common that bsddb3 is installed, but > that glibc offers bsddb2 simultaneously. For anydbm to analyse this > situation properly, it would need some of the more advanced bsddb > facilities. > > While this is the rationale for dropping the existing bsddb module > sooner or later, there are, of course, numerous advantages in exposing > the additional BSDDB features, like concurrency, transactions, and > cursors. > > Any opinions? Sounds like a good plan, but we should make sure it can all be re-released under the PSF license. For the Zope Corp. portions of the code I promise that's no problem :-) -- but there are so many other contributors that it's getting a little tangled... --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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