Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2025 17:24:39 -0400
From: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com>,
	Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>,
	pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org, Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
	Mankirat Singh <mankiratsingh1315@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: abi-compliance-check failure due to recent changes to
 pg_{clear,restore}_{attribute,relation}_stats()
Message-ID: <aQKGF1OnClNRY4j4@momjian.us>
References: <1841741.1760737904@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <8BF4CB66-9DD7-41A3-B495-28B13D302F51@justatheory.com>
 <1851362.1760742456@sss.pgh.pa.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1851362.1760742456@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/aQKGF1OnClNRY4j4%40momjian.us>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 07:07:36PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> "David E. Wheeler" <david@justatheory.com> writes:
> > On Oct 17, 2025, at 17:51, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.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@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Do not let urgent matters crowd out time for investment in the future.