June 24, 2002
6:34 p.m.
"SM" == Skip Montanaro <skip@pobox.com> writes:
Greg> should we keep the existing bsddb around as oldbsddb for Greg> users in that situation? Martin> I don't think so; users could always extract the module Martin> from older distributions if they want to. SM> I would prefer the old version be moved to lib-old (or SM> Modules-old?). For people still running DB 2.x it shouldn't SM> be a major headache to retrieve. Modules/old/ probably. We wouldn't do anything with that directory except use it as a placeholder for old extension source, right? Do we care about preserving the cvs history for the current bsddbmodule.c? If so, we'll have to ask SF to do a cvs dance for us. It may not be worth it. -Barry