It never fails (bsddb retirement in 2.3)

["Martin v. Löwis"]

Skip Montanaro wrote:

> Do you envision the install operation automatically adding 
> 
>     import bsddb185 as bsddb
> 
> in either sitecustomize.py or site.py?  If not, then the solution is still
> not perfect for Nick.

No, I envision no such change, and yes, the solution is not perfect for 
him. He has to actively port his code to Python 2.3.

However, there is one obstacle he can overcome, and one obstacle he 
can't overcome. He can change the code himself, to add

try:
   import bsddb185 as bsddb
except ImportError:
   import bsddb

into his code. However, he cannot have his sysadmins edit Modules/Setup.

I don't think we should attempt to continue to transparently support the 
bsddb 1.85 library. People will need to go through some effort, and they 
may consider whether their effort is better spend elsewhere (e.g. in 
obtaining a copy of Sleepycat, or invoking the database upgrade 
utility). It should be a reasonable effort, where apparently changing 
the source in a few places is reasonable, and convincing powers-that-be 
is not.

If, for some people, the classification of a "reasonable effort" is vice 
versa, they can use administrative mechanisms to globally restore 
bsddb-as-a-module, e.g. by editing sitecustomize or editing the source 
code of bsddbmodule.c.

Regards,
Martin