Re: sqlite3

[Qiantan Hong]

>>> We just started this experiment, let's see how it unfolds before
>>> considering our next steps.
>> Putting the more specialized multisession.el interface in master means 
>> we will need to provide backward compatibility even if at some point
>> store.el is added.
> 
> Assuming we decide that extending what we have is indeed necessary;
> that is not a given.  And if we do decide, I see no catastrophe: we
> are doing this all the time, keeping backward compatibility as we go.
> There's no need to be afraid of that.
Sure. I can see many cases where store.el interface is more suitable
than multisession.el, particularly when a package need… literally a
persistent store… that is basically a persistent hashtable, with key
not necessarily symbols. One example is org-id. Guess I’ll try
to put store.el on Elpa first and see if those package will use it.

As for compatibly, I must be understanding something wrong.
I thought that any interface that went into master must be kept.
Is that not true? Are interface kept only when they went into a release?