[pybsddb] Request For Comments: Deprecation of BerkeleyDB pre-4.0

Olivier Lauzanne olauzanne at gmail.com
Thu Mar 27 23:27:18 CET 2008

First I aggree with the idea of not bothering about Berkeley DB 3.

2008/3/27, Jaroslav Pachola <j_p at centrum.cz>:
> > I was wondering also about changing the lib name from "bsddb3" to
> > "bsddb4", to reflect the fact. This would require to update
> > applications. Opinions?.
> I'd rather would not do this. For me the point of bsddb3 module name is a
> way
> to distinguish the module from the built in one and the module name does
> not
> have to reflect the supported Berkeley DB release. Unlike, say, Qt3 vs Qt4
> there is no major API incompatibility, so even if I see some reasons for
> the
> change, my opinion is that it's not worth breaking of applications
> functionality.

Well yeah but bsddb3 doesn't make any sense if it only supports berkeley DB
4 ...
On the other hand I don't really like having the number in the name in the
first place. Why not go for a complete rename then, like berkeleydb ? That
is longer ... but more explicit too ... and since the name is usually typed
only once for a "from berkeleydb import db"

It's true that's it's not cool to change the name without changing the API.
And if a major API change is planned it would be better to wait for this API
change to change the name also. But if this API change never happens it
would be stupid to stay with an unappropriate name for years.

my 2 cents,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jcea.es/pipermail/pybsddb/attachments/20080327/9b817295/attachment.htm>

More information about the pybsddb mailing list