| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Aleksander Alekseev <aleksander(at)timescale(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Marco Slot <marco(dot)slot(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Pavan Deolasee <pavan(dot)deolasee(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases |
| Date: | 2024-11-16 00:00:02 |
| Message-ID: | 900DE0C9-48C4-474C-BDC9-AD495D8D3F59@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Nov 15, 2024, at 16:13, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> In other words, our current guidelines
> for preserving ABI compatibility actually *created* this disaster,
> because the HEAD change was fine from an ABI standpoint but what
> was done in back branches was not. So we do need to rethink how
> that's worded.
What bit is mis-worded? The guidance Peter committed[1] says that “PostgreSQL makes an effort to avoid server
ABI breaks in minor releases.” It sounds to me like that effort wasn’t held up in back-branches, the sources for minor releases.
But maybe you had some other guidance in mind?
D
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2024-11-16 00:30:56 | Re: Potential ABI breakage in upcoming minor releases |
| Previous Message | Jonathan S. Katz | 2024-11-15 23:28:42 | IMPORTANT: Out-of-cycle release scheduled for November 21, 2024 |