On Wed, Sep 3, 2008 at 8:36 PM, Raymond Hettinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Skip> Remind me why we want to get rid of bsddb? >> >> Benjamin> The reasons are enumerated in PEP 3108. >> >> Not much justification and no references to outside discussion for such a >> heavily used package which has been part of Python for a long time in one >> form or another. > > Well said.
Frankly I don't see a big deal with not including it in *3.0* so long as a reference to where to download it as an add on (jcea's pybsddb site) is included in the release notes and PEP 3108. I've updated the relevant documentation in 3.0. I'm not going to fight a battle against its removal when I know several python devs are already way to scarred and cranky to ever change their minds due to BerkeleyDB itself being painful to get working right on all platforms. Theres truth to that not being worth our time if we actually want to test the module properly to avoid shipping a lemon. The fact that the Python Lib/bsddb/test/ test suite has uncovered actual Oracle/Sleepycat BerkeleyDB bugs in supposedly stable releases has always disturbed me. I do wish this had been discussed on comp.lang.python before now rather than pulling the rug out at the last minute. oh well. -gps PS Thank you jcea for your wonderful work on improving bsddb! Regardless of whether it appears in the standard library in the future you're making many users very happy with your work. _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
