"TJ O'Donnell" <tjo@xxxxxxx> writes: > I understand and appreciate bug fixes, but isn't one of the purposes of > major releases to provide some stability (say of API) within > the major release? Our traditional definition of API stability within a release series has considered only the SQL level: no forced initdbs, no changes of SQL-level semantics (at least not without darn good reason). Providing stability of backend-internal APIs has not been on the radar screen at all. I'm entirely unwilling to buy into a proposal that reads "no .h file changes within a release series". To make this fly, there'd need to be a clear, and rather narrow, definition of which aspects of the backend internal environment are considered API exported for add-ons to use. Which would be a good thing to have, really, but even developing a proposal would be a huge amount of work (never mind getting everyone to agree to it ;-)). Are you volunteering? BTW, this seems pretty far off-topic for -general; I suggest using -hackers for further discussion. regards, tom lane
