From: Jon Date: 2013-07-09T08:07:34+09:00 Subject: [ruby-core:55864] Re: ruby 1.9.3 p448 breaks ABI On Tue, 9 Jul 2013 06:50:16 +0900 KOSAKI Motohiro wrote: > (7/8/13 5:36 PM), V��t Ondruch wrote: > > Dne 8.7.2013 17:03, Yorick Peterse napsal(a): > >> Out of curiosity, does this tool take into account deprecated/internal > >> symbols? rb_f_lambda has been deprecated for a while now and didn't do > >> anything but call "rb_block_lambda". The function still appears to be > >> located in proc.c though. > >> > >> Yorick > >> > > > > I know it was deprecated. Nevertheless, removal of the function > > definition was definitely not needed. It fixes nothing while there is > > tiny chance that it may break something. > > > > With my maintainer of Ruby for Red Hat Enterprise Linux hat, how am I > > supposed to defend the need of rebase of Ruby to the latest point > > release, when it introduces ABI breakage? > > When you have your specific requirement, your should use your hand instead of us. > Write a tool or watch a branch update by yourself. > > We don't intent to break anything. But we don't guarantee it especially if it is out > of our scope. > Given that not all are native English speakers, I'd like to be 100% sure I understand what is meant by "...it is out of our scope" with regards to ABI breakage by a point release. I'm aware of the following wiki page that briefly mentions ABI https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby/wiki/ReleaseEngineering but I'm not aware of any ruby-core doco describing what is "in scope" and "out of scope" regarding ABI compliance. Does "...it is out of our scope" mean that ruby-core views point releases as "in scope" when the point releases are "best efforts ABI compatible", but "100% (strict) ABI compatibility" for point releases is "out of scope", or something else? For example, for any 1.9.3pXYZ point release, does ruby-core view it as "out of scope" to be 100% 1.9.1 ABI compatible, but "in scope" to be best efforts 1.9.1 ABI compatible? Jon