[Python-Dev] bsddb and sqlite

Steve Holden steve at holdenweb.com
Mon Sep 8 00:43:30 CEST 2008

Oleg Broytmann wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 07, 2008 at 11:34:37AM -0700, Gregory P. Smith wrote:
>> You could probably have built the bsddb185 module and loaded your data
>> from that and rewritten it using the new bsddb module.
>    I built bsddb185, loaded old data, exported it to... I don't remember
> now, but I clearly remember I stopped using bsddb.
>> The lesson for python: when that happens lets write the code to make
>> the transition between formats trivial.
>    For me the lesson is different - do not include modules in the stdlib
> that relies on unstable 3rd party libraries. I consider bsddb unstable.
> sqlite is more stable, but PySQLite... there are many minor releases between
> Python releases; my humble opinion is it'd be better to have one external
> PySQLite module than two (PySQLite and sqlite3).
Unfortunately this advice should have been taken several years ago. The
fact is that there are almost certainly Python users who rely on the
presence of the bsddb module for production work, and simply removing it
without deprecation is bound to upset those users.

I'm particularly concerned that it appears that normal procedures have
been circumvented to enable its removal from 3.0. Since we have at least
one developer committed to ongoing support that seems both harsh and

Steve Holden        +1 571 484 6266   +1 800 494 3119
Holden Web LLC              http://www.holdenweb.com/

More information about the Python-Dev mailing list