Re: psycopg is the new psycopg3?
От | Adrian Klaver |
---|---|
Тема | Re: psycopg is the new psycopg3? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | a049d6d5-cf62-3306-0ca1-dd0f81b9e1b5@aklaver.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: psycopg is the new psycopg3? (Daniele Varrazzo <daniele.varrazzo@gmail.com>) |
Список | psycopg |
On 6/26/21 4:48 AM, Daniele Varrazzo wrote: > On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 at 08:47, Federico Di Gregorio <fog@dndg.it> wrote: > >> Reading all the messages I have second toughts. If psycopg2 is here to >> stay, i.e., if it will not be completely replaced by "psycopg3" (and by >> completely I mean shutting down everything about it) then we will have >> the following situation: >> >> psycopg2 version 2.x.y >> psycopg version 3.w.z >> >> that at first sight is a bit confusing, isn't it? > > I have been settled with psycopg3 as the package name for a bit. Then, > a few days ago, releasing psycopg 2.9, I got to see some problems. The > main one is that, in order to respect semver, we should accept > introducing breaking changes only at the change of the main version. > People have been very confused to see breaking changes, although they > were minor, from 2.8 to 2.9. > > Semver is much more an accepted, and expected, version number > organisation than having the major number in the package name. I can > expect to see psycopg 4, psycopg 5 etc. as we need to introduce > breaking changes. So I think, although going from psycopg2 v2.x to > psycopg v3.x might be confusing, the need to pin to the minor version > instead of the major is probably more so, and would come to bite us > much more often. Somewhere you lost me in the above. What exactly is the proposed package naming and versioning going to be going forward? > > "import psycopg" is ready to merge > (https://github.com/psycopg/psycopg3/commit/7e526af8aca1c31b32a3ad55a0baf0de477c961c) > > -- Daniele > > -- Adrian Klaver adrian.klaver@aklaver.com
В списке psycopg по дате отправления: