Tom Lane wrote:
> Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> writes:
> > Bruce Momjian writes:
> >> Do I need to increment the other interfaces that
> >> _use_ libpq, like ecpg?
>
> > If and only if the libpq API is part of their documented API. For ecpg I
> > think this is not the case, but for libpq++ it would seem to be the case.
>
> However, an app linked against libpq++ would also be linked against
> libpq, and so the incompatibility will be flagged by the linker anyway.
> I can see no need to bump libpq++'s own number.
New question --- didn't we change the externally visible PGNotify
structure in libpq-fe.h in 7.3, and as returned by PQnotifies:
PGnotify *PQnotifies(PGconn *conn)
meaning if ecpg references PGnotify, should it have a new major number
too, so actually, we did change the API in 7.3 and not just the binary
compatibility.
-- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610)
359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square,
Pennsylvania19073
