Thread: pgsql: Added ECPGget_PGconn() function to ecpglib, courtesy of Mike
pgsql: Added ECPGget_PGconn() function to ecpglib, courtesy of Mike
From
meskes@postgresql.org (Michael Meskes)
Date:
Log Message:
-----------
Added ECPGget_PGconn() function to ecpglib, courtesy of Mike Aubury.
Bumped library version to 6.1.
Tags:
----
REL8_3_STABLE
Modified Files:
--------------
pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg:
ChangeLog (r1.370.2.3 -> r1.370.2.4)
(http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/ChangeLog?r1=1.370.2.3&r2=1.370.2.4)
pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/ecpglib:
Makefile (r1.54 -> r1.54.2.1)
(http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/ecpglib/Makefile?r1=1.54&r2=1.54.2.1)
connect.c (r1.48 -> r1.48.2.1)
(http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/ecpglib/connect.c?r1=1.48&r2=1.48.2.1)
pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/include:
ecpglib.h (r1.74.2.1 -> r1.74.2.2)
(http://anoncvs.postgresql.org/cvsweb.cgi/pgsql/src/interfaces/ecpg/include/ecpglib.h?r1=1.74.2.1&r2=1.74.2.2)
meskes@postgresql.org (Michael Meskes) writes:
> Log Message:
> -----------
> Added ECPGget_PGconn() function to ecpglib, courtesy of Mike Aubury.
> Bumped library version to 6.1.
> Tags:
> ----
> REL8_3_STABLE
This should absolutely *not* have been done in a stable release branch.
Kindly revert.
regards, tom lane
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 04:36:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > This should absolutely *not* have been done in a stable release branch. I thought about this for a while before committing but failed to see where an additional function could harm the stable release. There is however an advantage, namely enabling aubit with PGSQL 8.3 again. Without this change it won't work with this release. I do agree though that normally you don't want to do this in a stable branch. > Kindly revert. Is this consensus around here? I don't to argue about this just tried to help some people. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
Michael Meskes <meskes@postgresql.org> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 04:36:15PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> This should absolutely *not* have been done in a stable release branch.
> I thought about this for a while before committing but failed to see
> where an additional function could harm the stable release. There is
> however an advantage, namely enabling aubit with PGSQL 8.3 again.
> Without this change it won't work with this release.
It's not the extra function that I object to so much as the library
version number bump. That's going to create problems for packagers.
regards, tom lane
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 10:30:18AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > It's not the extra function that I object to so much as the library > version number bump. That's going to create problems for packagers. Ah, I didn't think far enough. Sorry, your definitely right on this one. Reverted. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
Michael Meskes wrote: > On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 10:30:18AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > >> It's not the extra function that I object to so much as the library >> version number bump. That's going to create problems for packagers. >> > > Ah, I didn't think far enough. Sorry, your definitely right on this one. > Reverted. > > > But is it OK to add a function to the library without bumping the version? AFAICS all you have reverted is the version bump, so we could have two versions of the library with the same version number, one with the new function and one without - that seems somewhat undesirable. Also, regardless of the safety or otherwise, isn't it our standard practice not to change anything in stable releases except for bug fixes? That's part of what makes Postgres so stable, in fact. cheers andrew
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 05:34:44PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote: > But is it OK to add a function to the library without bumping the > version? AFAICS all you have reverted is the version bump, so we could With most people refering to ecpg 8.3.1 (for instance) anyway I think the risk is rather small. > have two versions of the library with the same version number, one with > the new function and one without - that seems somewhat undesirable. It is indeed. > Also, regardless of the safety or otherwise, isn't it our standard > practice not to change anything in stable releases except for bug fixes? > That's part of what makes Postgres so stable, in fact. I still fail to see how this added function could pose a problem. It does, however, fix a bug - make that a missing, undocumenterd feature - that causes the aubit application to break. Michael -- Michael Meskes Email: Michael at Fam-Meskes dot De, Michael at Meskes dot (De|Com|Net|Org) ICQ: 179140304, AIM/Yahoo: michaelmeskes, Jabber: meskes@jabber.org Go VfL Borussia! Go SF 49ers! Use Debian GNU/Linux! Use PostgreSQL!
Michael Meskes wrote: > >> Also, regardless of the safety or otherwise, isn't it our standard >> practice not to change anything in stable releases except for bug fixes? >> That's part of what makes Postgres so stable, in fact. >> > > I still fail to see how this added function could pose a problem. It > does, however, fix a bug - make that a missing, undocumenterd feature - > that causes the aubit application to break. > > > Arguably, it is aubit that is/was buggy in relying on the undocumented "feature". I don't think this particular change poses a great danger, but I do think it's a bad precedent. Anyway, I've said my piece, and don't want to take it further. cheers andrew