On 11/10/20 9:12 AM, Daniele Varrazzo wrote: > Hello, > > I have received some concerned voices in regard to have a package called > "psycopg3". I guess many have been burned out by 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 nobody uses v1 anymore, I > think the name can be considered free. I believe it even predates pypi > and the requirements.txt convention. Dark times... > > Anyone against using "psycopg" as package name, and starting from 3 as > version number?
Yes.
1) "psycopg" is widely used as an alias for psycopg2, so that will cause confusion.
2) I see a lot of explaining why the order of versions is psycopg2, psycopg.
3) People don't seem to be confused that you can use psycopg2 with both Python 2 and 3.