| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> |
| Cc: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: Document ABI Compatibility |
| Date: | 2024-06-17 22:39:07 |
| Message-ID: | 95FF99C6-0EE4-4A6D-AEB0-CEDC60953CDC@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 12, 2024, at 11:30, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie> wrote:
> I'm a little surprised that we don't seem to have all that many
> problems with ABI breakage, though. Although we theoretically have a
> huge number of APIs that extension authors might choose to use, that
> isn't really true in practical terms. The universe of theoretically
> possible problems is vastly larger than the areas where we see
> problems in practice. You have to be pragmatic about it.
Things go wrong far less often than one might fear! Given this relative stability, I think it’s reasonable to document what heretofore assumed the policy is so that the fears can largely be put to rest by clear expectations.
Best,
David
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2024-06-17 22:40:59 | Re: Proposal: Document ABI Compatibility |
| Previous Message | David E. Wheeler | 2024-06-17 22:37:29 | Re: Proposal: Document ABI Compatibility |