[DB-SIG] what is: backwards compatibility

[Carsten Haese]

On Fri, 2007-06-22 at 20:07 +0200, Dieter Maurer wrote:
> Carl Karsten wrote at 2007-6-21 14:30 -0500:
> > ...
> >I propose that pep 249 is the only document that we should be considering.
> 
> -1
> 
> 
> >What happens if docs and pep 249 conflict?
> 
> The more specific wins.

The question is vacuous. The documentation for a DB-API v2
implementation should never conflict with PEP 249, because that would
mean that either the documentation is incorrect or the implementation is
not compliant.

Of course, PEP 249 is only the mandatory minimum. Implementations may
and do implement more functionality than what PEP 249 mandates. In those
cases, the implementation documentation is the authoritative source.

We'd create a problem if we introduced language into the v3 spec that
contradicts existing v2 implementations, because that would force the v2
implementation to be either non-compliant or not backwards compatible.
That would not be good, which is why additions to the spec are being
discussed this thoroughly.

-- 
Carsten Haese
http://informixdb.sourceforge.net