On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Ben Reser <b...@reser.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 2, 2013 at 5:07 AM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: >> As noted on IRC earlier, we just deprecated BDB so that we wouldn't >> have to continue supporting multiple backends. But it seems you have >> just created a third/new backend. > > I think that's an incorrect assertion about why we deprecated BDB. > The goal was not to have one backend it was to get rid of BDB. Some > reasons were: > 1) BDB is not being actively improved so FSFS is surpassing it. > 2) BDB support requires an extra dependency which requires extra > effort on our part to install and test with. > +1.
> There is no conflict in my opinion to creating another backend > provided it is being actively improved. I pretty much expect us to > replace FSFS with something new at some point and have some overlap > there again. It might even be another DB based backend that has some > dependencies. Completely agree. -- Ivan Zhakov
