Gerhard Häring wrote: > Keen Anthony wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I am currently using psycopg 2 as my db adapter for a mod_python & >>> PostgreSQL web app. It's works fine, and I haven't any complaints. I >>> would appreciate some input on what other pythonistas like in an >>> adapter. There were several different options available to me, but there >>> was no particular informed reason for me to choose psycopg. Am I missing >>> anything? > > Considering pyPgSQL, psycopg1, PyGreSQL and psycopg2 - psycopg2 is a good > choice.
Hmmm, Gerhard, you are listed as one of two developers for pyPgSQL on SourceForge ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/pypgsql/ ). The fact that you are recommending a different DB adaptor project suggests a degree of disengagement with pyPgSQL. Is Billy G. Allie still interested in pyPgSQL, or is it now completely unloved? If so, then perhaps some new maintainers can be found for it - several projects rely on pyPgSQL, including ours ( http://sourceforge.net/projects/netepi/ ) - for which we currently need to provide our own pyPgSQL tarball rolled from CVS plus some of our own minor but important patches - which were submitted for consideration but have not (AFAIK) been checked into the pyPgSQL CVS. The latest tarball for pyPgSQl available from the pyPgSQL SourceForge pages is dated 2003. No criticism is intended in any of the foregoing observations - it is inevitable that people move on to new projects (such as pySQLite), but it would be a shame if pyPgSQL just rotted, because it has several things in its favour, such as some unit tests (which were conspicuously absent from any of the alternatives when we evaluated them in 2003 - perhaps they have been added by now). Overall we have found pyPgSQL to be very reliable. Tim C -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
