-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Antoine Pitrou wrote: > I agree about performance but I don't think it's right to say we can fix > stability later. This is a storage module, and people risk losing their data > if > there are glaring bugs. If we really want an efficient dbm-compatible storage > backend for all platforms on 3.0, then why not bite the bullet and re-add > bsddb? > Even though it has its quirks, it's certainly much more tested than a > hypothetical dbm.sqlite whipped up in a few days and used by nobody in the > wild.
Of course I'm +1 to re-adding bsddb, moreover with 3.0 slipping the original 1st October release. But note than Guido in person "rather prefer" to drop bsddb in 3.0. I have a conflict talking about sqlite dbm module in 3.0. So I rather do not vote on that issue. - -- Jesus Cea Avion _/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.jcea.es/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ jabber / xmpp:[EMAIL PROTECTED] _/_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/_/ . _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "Things are not so easy" _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "My name is Dump, Core Dump" _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/ _/_/ "El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iQCVAwUBSNFMA5lgi5GaxT1NAQI9ywP/U4g7PjtMp5Uae0NMxByCJsbFgJPXkbMx S8xi31YqUx9j3hc/3vFjYH2+Ywf1WPTDfUN3LLhf0oVBEbwJl9QQKyua0e2AesBY g6qQ0meZdpRHm0WzHByI5/aMkxAnwEoHILveMubnQRr1KpTexGHEa6mXv5aVwkJm 6KIqS3tG0kk= =XMnZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ 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
