Re: [SQLObject] dbm connection

[Oleg B. <ph...@ph...>]

On Tue, Dec 07, 2004 at 10:32:37AM -0600, Ian Bicking wrote:
> Yes, we can just get rid of it.  I had moved it aside when I separated 
> db backends into separate packages, but I hadn't tested it since -- he. 

   Removed at revision 463.

> and there's other better embedded databases.

   In context of SQLObject - SQLite, of course. I don't have a word
against BerkeleyDB or GNU dbm, but in context of SQLObject I'd like to
recommend to use an established SQL environemnt for bsddb - MySQL!
   Somewhere in a distant future I'd like to think about making
SQLObject-like API for non-SQL based stores (dbm, xml, csv), but they
should be implemented at much higher level - something like DBMObject
and XMLObject, not at the connection level.

Oleg.
-- 
     Oleg Broytmann            http://phd.pp.ru/            ph...@ph...
           Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.