Why we move to libdbi rather than libgda?

[Phil Longstaff]

On Sat, 2010-05-22 at 22:49 +1000, Tao Wang wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> When I look at the file 'packaging/win32/libdbi-0.8.3.patch', I found
> the libdbi hasn't been actively developed for a long time, the last
> release is 2 years ago. On the other hand, 'libgda' is keeping active
> development, now is version 4. I also found the discussion in the
> mailing list:
> 
> [DB abstraction layer: libdbi vs libgda]
> https://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-devel/2006-October/018976.html
> 
> I looks we were going to move to libgda. However, the current
> dependency shows GnuCash is using libdbi. So, what happened? What made
> us move to the 'libdbi' rather than 'libgda'?

There is a thread about libdbi vs libgda as well.  Basically, when I
started the sql backend, I used libgda v3.  A few bugs, but usable.
They then started developing libgda v4.  Given a new major release,
interface changes, internal changes, I was running into more problems.
In addition, there was the question of what version the various
distributions would have.  In contrast, libdbi was more stable.

There is still some activity going on with libdbi, but slowly.  I agree
that a new release would be good.

Phil