| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Laurenz Albe <laurenz(dot)albe(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Proposal: Document ABI Compatibility |
| Date: | 2024-06-12 14:02:05 |
| Message-ID: | C7A6EC2E-0B02-4237-A254-99DB27ED8D03@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Jun 12, 2024, at 8:43 AM, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org> wrote:
>> Right, it’s just that extension authors could use some notification that such a change is coming so they can update their code, if necessary.
>
> I think since around 6 years ago we have been much more vigilant about avoiding ABI breaks. So if there aren't any more recent examples of breakage, then maybe that was ultimately successful, and the upshot is, continue to be vigilant at about the same level?
That sounds great to me. I’d like to get it documented, though, so that extension and other third party developers are aware of it, and not just making wild guesses and scaring each other over (perhaps) misconceptions.
D
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2024-06-12 14:31:49 | Re: SQL:2011 application time |
| Previous Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2024-06-12 13:57:03 | Re: Add support to TLS 1.3 cipher suites and curves lists |