From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Centralizing protective copying of utility statements
In-reply-to: <20210617192543.fgiffbsiyxdf47iz@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <931771.1623893989@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <974666.1623943810@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1026052.1623949409@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20210617192543.fgiffbsiyxdf47iz@alap3.anarazel.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Thu, 17 Jun 2021 12:25:43 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1040161.1623959602.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2021 15:53:22 -0400
Message-ID: <1040162.1623959602@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/1040162.1623959602%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Phew. Do we really want to break a quite significant number of
> extensions this long after feature freeze? Since we already need to find
> a backpatchable way to deal with the issue it seems like deferring the
> API change to 15 might be prudent?

Uh, nobody ever promised that server-internal APIs are frozen as of beta1;
that would be a horrid crimp on our ability to fix bugs during beta.
I've generally supposed that we don't start expecting that till RC stage.

			regards, tom lane