On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 6:12 PM Daniele Varrazzo
<daniele.varrazzo@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I have received some concerned voices in regard to have a package called "psycopg3". I guess many have been burned
outby the Python 2 to 3 transition, and now it's not a happy pair of number to see next to each other. Sorry,
Fibonacci...
>
> The rationale behind having the 2 in the package name was to allow the coexistence between v1 and 2. But now that
nobodyuses v1 anymore, I think the name can be considered free. I believe it even predates pypi and the
requirements.txtconvention. Dark times...
>
> Anyone against using "psycopg" as package name, and starting from 3 as version number?
This is a not entirely unsimilar case to what pgAdmin4 is going
through right now (they started with pgadmin4 version 1.0, which then
led to a lot of confusion for people).
Thus, regardless of if you call it psycopg or psycopg3, please make
sure you start with version 3 :)
--
Magnus Hagander
Me: https://www.hagander.net/
Work: https://www.redpill-linpro.com/