I am preparing for a release of EmacSQL, which provides two new SQLite back-ends. These back-ends are safer and faster than the current back-end, and all users should prefer them over the old backend. EmacSQL now also automatically picks the best back-end, depending on the used Emacs version and whether it has been compiled with support for SQLite or modules. Previously packages that used EmacSQL had to either do that themselves or force users to use a certain back-end.
My Forge and Epkg packages use EmacSQL, but they also use the intermediate CloSQL package. While the changes to EmacSQL are backward compatible, those to CloSQL are not. As a consequence, Forge and Epkg could not take advantage of the improvements until I pushed the changes to CLoSQL.
I had to delay doing that because it is not a backward compatible change and because two third-party packages, including Code-Review still need to be adapted. I have informed their maintainers about this over a month ago, but still haven't heard from them.
I have decided to push these changes now anyway, because I do not want to withhold these improvements from most users any longer. Unfortunately this breaks Code-Review until it is adjusted. I wish we could have handled this more gracefully.
I am preparing for a release of EmacSQL, which provides two new SQLite back-ends. These back-ends are safer and faster than the current back-end, and all users should prefer them over the old backend. EmacSQL now also automatically picks the best back-end, depending on the used Emacs version and whether it has been compiled with support for SQLite or modules. Previously packages that used EmacSQL had to either do that themselves or force users to use a certain back-end.
My Forge and Epkg packages use EmacSQL, but they also use the intermediate CloSQL package. While the changes to EmacSQL are backward compatible, those to CloSQL are not. As a consequence, Forge and Epkg could not take advantage of the improvements until I pushed the changes to CLoSQL.
I had to delay doing that because it is not a backward compatible change and because two third-party packages, including Code-Review still need to be adapted. I have informed their maintainers about this over a month ago, but still haven't heard from them.
I have decided to push these changes now anyway, because I do not want to withhold these improvements from most users any longer. Unfortunately this breaks Code-Review until it is adjusted. I wish we could have handled this more gracefully.