[Python-ideas] Official MySQL module
Eric V. Smith
eric at trueblade.com
Fri Mar 8 13:54:52 CET 2013
On 3/8/2013 7:39 AM, Amaury Forgeot d'Arc wrote:
> 2013/3/8 Eric V. Smith <eric at trueblade.com <mailto:eric at trueblade.com>>
> On 3/8/2013 3:06 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
> > On 08.03.2013 00:20, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> >> The number one question to ask about candidates for standard library
> >> inclusion is "Does it make sense for this module to receive new
> >> features only once every 18-24 months, and only when you upgrade to a
> >> new version of Python?". Interfaces to specific external services
> >> (including databases) almost never pass that test.
> > Agreed.
> I agree with this, too. However, I think this is a transient situation,
> not a permanent one. It's entirely possible that there exists, or will
> exist, a MySQL binding that meets this criteria. I don't know. But it
> shouldn't preclude us considering a binding that meets the criteria.
> As to Greg's point about not including a database binding that requires
> other software to run, I disagree. It's client/server: do we really need
> to include the server in order to supply the client? We include nntplib,
> with no server. We include webbrowser, but no web browser. imaplib, but
> no imap server. Etc.
> Doesn't a MySQL binding have to link with some client library? libmysql.so?
> How is it licensed?
> I found this
> page: http://www.mysql.com/about/legal/licensing/foss-exception/
> which seems to prevent redistribution under non-free licenses.
It's not true that a client library is required. PyMySQL is pure Python.
We could also write a C connection module ourselves, if needed.
Again, I'm not saying I know there's a library suitable for stdlib
inclusion, or that the time is right for such inclusion. I'm just
saying that it's possible, and I think it's desirable.
More information about the Python-ideas