| From: | Daniele Varrazzo <daniele(dot)varrazzo(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | psycopg(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | psycopg is the new psycopg3? |
| Date: | 2020-11-10 17:12:05 |
| Message-ID: | CA+mi_8Y5L-gnio+RUs6XtfOqEbOAiyVS8y9XqYSkfLB8dnPd8w@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | psycopg |
Hello,
I have received some concerned voices in regard to have a package called
"psycopg3". I guess many have been burned out by the Python 2 to 3
transition, and now it's not a happy pair of number to see next to each
other. Sorry, Fibonacci...
The rationale behind having the 2 in the package name was to allow the
coexistence between v1 and 2. But now that nobody uses v1 anymore, I think
the name can be considered free. I believe it even predates pypi and the
requirements.txt convention. Dark times...
Anyone against using "psycopg" as package name, and starting from 3 as
version number?
Cheers,
-- Daniele
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rory Campbell-Lange | 2020-11-10 17:24:01 | Re: psycopg is the new psycopg3? |
| Previous Message | Daniele Varrazzo | 2020-11-10 03:43:29 | Re: psycopg3 and adaptation choices |