| From: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Mankirat Singh <mankiratsingh1315(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats() |
| Date: | 2025-10-29 23:13:32 |
| Message-ID: | 3476556C-48A4-4ABF-A8F6-186EACA32BE8@justatheory.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Oct 29, 2025, at 17:37, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> In the past we've never really thought that ABI was more than mildly
> solidified until around rc1. On the whole I'd rather wait until after
> the branch before starting to check ABI, simply because I don't care
> for the idea of adding .abi-compliance-history in the master branch
> only to remove it again later. Having said that, it would be good
> if we *could* choose to do that, so I still do not like having any
> policy decisions about which branches to check hard-wired into the
> buildfarm client.
Well that’s pretty easily addressed by adding a configuration for it. Maybe a regex to match branches, defaulting to its current value[0], `/_STABLE$/`.
D
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2025-10-29 23:36:03 | Re: contrib/sepgsql regression tests have been broken for months |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2025-10-29 23:12:26 | Re: contrib/sepgsql regression tests have been broken for months |