Right now this module is a single package, which is OK since we only have one implementation with badger.

However, it would be better long-term design to have the interface and generic code/tests at the root package, and one sub-package for each implementation that pulls in heavy dependencies like badger.

If we don't do that, we could easily end up in the case where trying to use badger also forces importing (and thus linking into the binary) other database software.

The first suggestion that comes to mind is chaindb/<dbname>, like chaindb/badger. However, this would be unfortunate as it clashes with the name of the upstream badger package itself, and it's entirely reasonable to want to use both at the same time (e.g. when using our package along with database options from upstream).

Another idea is to use slightly different names, like chaindb/badgerdb. Though that doesn't really avoid the confusion between the two names.

The real difference here is that our package is an implementation, or a wrapper around upstream. Perhaps chaindb/badgerimpl? It's a bit ugly, but I think it's the least confusing.

Another option is to just do chaindb/badger, and then let the importer rename it as they please like import badgerimpl "github.com/ChainSafe/chaindb/badger". Perhaps this is the simplest option.