On Tue, 19 Oct 2004, Keith Herold wrote:
>Out of curiosity, how hard would it be to build a translation layer? I
>suppose it's easier to keep both versions around, and upgrade when
>necessary, but as a technical problem, it's at least interesting? Only
>downwardly, of course, so there would be no expectation that 2.X could use
>3.X, just the reverse. It had sounded as if only the file format was the
>problem; is it more than that?
>
>I'm not pushing, in any sense, just wondering if anyone has looked at this
>issue with an eye to resolving it.
There's nothing to resolve. In the discussion of SQLite3 requirements
earlier in the year, one of the issues that came up was database
migration, and the concensus on the list at the time was to forgo
automatic migration to keep the library simple.
Migration can be done very simply using the sqlite/sqlite3 shells and the
.dump command.
This was a conscious deliberate decision.
>
>--Keith
>
Christian
--
/"\
\ / ASCII RIBBON CAMPAIGN - AGAINST HTML MAIL
X - AGAINST MS ATTACHMENTS
/ \
