From: Aleksander Alekseev <a.alekseev@postgrespro.ru>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: Should we remove unused code?
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 18:37:51 +0300
Message-ID: <20160418183751.438b2f00@fujitsu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <25311.1460992733@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20160418180711.55ac82c0@fujitsu>
<25311.1460992733@sss.pgh.pa.us>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@postgresql.org?body=unsub%20pgsql-hackers>
Hello, Tom.
Thanks for your reply.
> The fact that make check-world doesn't run any code that uses some
> feature isn't a great argument for removing it. Consider third-party
> extensions, for starters.
What is current policy regarding such sort of things? Is everything
that is in .h files considered a public API and should be backward
compatible? In this case - for how long, forever or until next major
release? Or lets say there is some API that is not used neither
internally nor by any package available on PGXN. Can we break API then?
--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev
http://eax.me/
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Cc: a.alekseev@postgrespro.ru, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us
Subject: Re: Should we remove unused code?
In-Reply-To: <20160418183751.438b2f00@fujitsu>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox