On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 01:58:41PM +0100, Juan Pablo Carbajal wrote:
> <snip>
> It is possible to add your package as a subfolder of database (check
> geometry and octclip). We do not have subpackages yet. Of course, if
> you prefer to have it as an independent package I am not against it,
> this is just a suggestion.
Indeed I would not like to mix maintained code with unmaintained in
one package.
To be honest, I would much prefer to have a single database package, than a package for postgresql, one for mysql, one for sqlite, one for odbc, one for... The multiplication of niche packages does not benefit the end user IMO.
The current database package is broken and unmaintained. My suggestion would then be to drop the existing database package, and design yours such that you have a common interface and multiple backends. At the beginning, there would be only one postgresql backend. Nobody asks you to support the other database systems. But at least, there would be a common ground for someone to implement other backends.
This is just a suggestion, though. However I can easily see a use case where a user of the database package would design a system using a database. For testing purpose, he might want to use sqlite instead of a full postgresql server (simply because he doesn't have access to such server at the moment). Having different packages (most probably with different interfaces) would just make his life more complicated.
Michael.