Re: libpq-oauth: a mid-beta naming check

From: Jacob Champion <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com>, Antonin Houska <ah(at)cybertec(dot)at>, Wolfgang Walther <walther(at)technowledgy(dot)de>, Devrim Gündüz <devrim(at)gunduz(dot)org>, Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>
Subject: Re: libpq-oauth: a mid-beta naming check
Date: 2025-08-05 15:21:14
Message-ID: CAOYmi+=xbQcMErUVfUv-RHhRZTbJij9SiRpVG8Y4MiB4BUC8nw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Aug 5, 2025 at 2:39 AM Jelte Fennema-Nio <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Aug 2025 at 01:20, Jacob Champion
> <jacob(dot)champion(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> > So, as we approach Beta 3: can anyone think of a way that this plan will fail?
>
> It's not entirely clear what plan exactly you talk about here. Are you
> saying you want to remove the -MAJOR suffix now for PG18? Or you want
> to postpone doing that until PG19, when you would have designed a
> stable API?

That is a PG19 plan. I don't want to make any changes for 18 unless
someone can see a fatal flaw; this is just my mid-beta check.

> If your goal is to remove this
> during-upgrade breakage after PG19, then I'd say that seems totally
> fine for a new feature.

That's the hope, yes.

Thanks!
--Jacob

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Sami Imseih 2025-08-05 15:39:52 Re: Improve LWLock tranche name visibility across backends
Previous Message Tom Lane 2025-08-05 14:59:01 Re: Test to dump and restore objects left behind by regression