| From: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com>, 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 21:24:39 |
| Message-ID: | aQKGF1OnClNRY4j4@momjian.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 07:07:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david(at)justatheory(dot)com> writes:
> > On Oct 17, 2025, at 17:51, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> >> NO. The rule is: if there's no such file, do not apply ABI checking.
> >> We are not interested in ABI complaints against master.
>
> > It only runs against maintenance branches.
>
> That seems overcomplicated: how does the buildfarm know
> what's a maintenance branch? I think the rule should be
> just "run ABI checks if the control file exists, else not".
>
> As an example of why that's better, what if we did decide
> we wanted ABI checks on master?
I assume we would want ABI breakage checks on master between Beta 1 and
the time we branch for the new major release in July.
--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> https://momjian.us
EDB https://enterprisedb.com
Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Jeff Davis | 2025-10-29 21:37:22 | Re: downcase_identifier(): use method table from locale provider |
| Previous Message | Masahiko Sawada | 2025-10-29 20:41:39 | Re: Make COPY format extendable: Extract COPY TO format implementations |