I took the liberty of asking DRH's advice based on his experiences with sqlite/2/3, and he graciously replied:
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 10:02 AM > To: Robert Brewer > Subject: Re: Python 3 needs your help > > "Robert Brewer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello, > > > > There has been some discussion [1] lately on whether to rename the > > "python" interpreter to "python3" for Python 3.0. I immediately > > thought of "sqlite3" of course, and wondered if you had any advice > > for the Python developers about the benefits or hardships of your > > naming choices for sqlite. If you had just a couple minutes to add > > your experience to the discussion, it'd be a big help. > > The primary reason from going from "sqlite" to "sqlite3" was to > allow the same application to link against both libraries at the > same time. This was important during the transition period since > some programs needed to be able to read an SQLite v2 database then > write the content over to an SQLite v3 database as part of the > upgrade process. Even today, three years into version 3, there > still exist important programs (ex: PHP) which link against both > libraries by default. > > I do not recall encountering any problems with the "sqlite3" name. > Nobody has complained. And we have not had any negative experiences. > Everything has worked out well. > > If you are referring to the name of the SQLite CLI program as opposed > to the library, it is convenient to have a separate name for the > version 3 CLI since we often need to both the older version 2 and > new version 3 programs at the same time. For example, to upgrade a > legacy database: > > sqlite olddatabase .dump | sqlite3 newdatbase > > There are still many sqlite version 2 databases around, and so it > is important to be able to have both older "sqlite" and newer "sqlite3" > binaries in your PATH. I can imagine that it will similarly be > convenient to have both "python" and "python3" in your PATH at the > same time. > > I think calling it "python3" is probably a good idea. > > -- > D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
