[PEAK] PEAK CVS vs. ZODB CVS :: [pP]ersistence :: Round 1, Fight!

[Bob Ippolito]

On Feb 20, 2004, at 11:59 AM, Phillip J. Eby wrote:

> At 11:09 AM 2/20/04 -0500, Bob Ippolito wrote:
>
>> Well I need ZODB 3.3, and I'm not currently using PEAK at all right 
>> now, so I could care less about PEAK persistence.  Does ZODB4 even 
>> work reliably?
>
> I don't know.  PEAK only uses its persistence module, and absolutely 
> nothing else.
>
>
>>   There hasn't been a release in over 6 months.  Any estimate of how 
>> much work it would be to get PEAK and ZODB 3.3 to play along?
>
> Ugh.  IIRC, ZODB3.3 uses extension classes for its Persistence, which 
> is as thoroughly incompatible with PEAK as you can get.
>
> However, my plan for alpha 4 was to drop the use of ZODB altogether 
> and go with a PEAK-specific persistence mechanism.  But I haven't 
> designed that mechanism yet, so it's not a quick fix.

I'm pretty sure that the latest ZODB 3.3 doesn't use ExtensionClass, it 
uses a new style class (written in C).

>
>> Is persistence support easily separable from PEAK?
>
> No.  But there's another solution that *would* be a quick fix.  Try 
> installing ZODB and PEAK to different directories on your PYTHONPATH.  
> If I recall correctly, Python is supposed to look at the actual 
> file/directory name when finding a module or package, so it should be 
> possible to have both a 'persistence' and a 'Persistence' installed, 
> as long as they're in different directories.  See PEP 235 ( 
> http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0235.html ) for more details.

Yeah, but that breaks any time I setup.py install and forget to specify 
the alternative path :)  I was trying to avoid that.

-bob