[DB-SIG] Popy - Psycopg - PyPgSQL - PyGreSQL
Tue, 01 Oct 2002 16:34:12 +0200
At 07:39 2002-10-01 -0700, hazmat wrote:
>i'm interested, as user, in hearing of any benefits that this merger would
>bring from a code/technical perspective. i haven't heard any yet.
The merged driver would have more users and more developers.
This could lead to faster development and better testing.
There are also other aspects than code quality.
You touch it yourself below in your answer about
>open source brings choices, and thats not nesc. a bad thing.
No, but the more the merrier isn't always true either.
(I'm not by mistake on a Perl mailing list, am I? ;)
> >What is so important
> > with PyGreSQL if "everybody" thinks that it shouldn't
> > be used?
>several things, when i last used pygresql a couple of years ago, i found its
>db-api interface to be horribly broken. i believer there have been some fixes
>to this, in the interim *years*. perhaps most signifigantly from my own
>perspective is that it plays *very* poorly with zope. to wrt, datetime
>conversions, and the fact that its zope adapter executed queries serially
>(which is not nesc. the fault of pygresql) .
Then it seems that it's not so important to keep it
> > Oh? Why does PyDO use PyGreSQL then?
>i can't speak to why pydo uses pygresql, but there are a couple of reasons
>other projects use pygresql, imo. the biggest one is ease of distribution, as
>pygresql comes with postgres. another one is sometimes developers are not
>aware of the better alternatives
Just what I thought...
Wouldn't it then be better if PyGreSQL was replaced
with one of the other drivers then? Both good code,
less confusion for developers and ease of distribution.
(A merge sounds less hostile than a takeover though...)
Magnus Lycka, Thinkware AB
Alvans vag 99, SE-907 50 UMEA, SWEDEN
phone: int+46 70 582 80 65, fax: int+46 70 612 80 65