Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats()

On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 02:45:12PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 01:15:20PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>>> FWIW, I favor the approach of having an in-tree, per-branch file
>>> containing the commit hash of a commit that is the current ABI
>>> reference for that branch.
>
>> I'm new to the topic, but IMHO the per-branch file approach is by far the
>> best approach. Not only is it much more flexible, but we could even use it
>> as a centralized list of ABI breaks for a given branch with justification
>> for each. I can't think of any strong advantages of keeping this stuff in
>> git metadata. git itself uses a file for blame.ignoreRevsFile...
>
> Good idea. We'd have to allow comments in the file, but that's
> probably a good thing anyway.

I've attached a first try. You'll notice that I have borrowed heavily from
.git-blame-ignore-revs. Some other things that might be worthwhile:

* Add commentary about when this file is needed (i.e., after the .0).
* Add instructions for creating file on new stable branch to
RELEASE_CHANGES.
* Adjust format for readability. It is a bit comment-heavy at the moment.

Anything else? I suppose this idea is entirely dependent on the
maintainers of the abi-compliance-check code to adapt to it, so we'll need
buy-in from them, too.

--
nathan