Revert committing API changes

[Kixunil]

IIUC the motivation behind committing API changes was to show the diff of the API. This is really not needed and it's just annoying. We can simply checkout and old commit in CI, generate the API list on it and store in a file, then checkout HEAD and generate the API on that, then just print the diff. For convenience we can have a bot comment with a link to the output if there is a any change.

[apoelstra]

We can simply checkout and old commit in CI, generate the API list on it and store in a file, then checkout HEAD and generate the API on that, then just print the diff.

Can we include a script in contrib/ that does this?

For convenience we can have a bot comment with a link to the output if there is a any change.

Sounds good to me! Probably we could even inline the output, unsure what the practical limits are and whether Github will give us a small box with scrollbars or a huge box that readers have to scroll past.

[apoelstra]

FWIW I find the API diff very useful even though it's noisier than I'd like. But I agree it's annoying to regenerate it, esp as you have to do a cargo install of a tool with a gazillion no-doubt-unvetted deps.

[tcharding]

I don't mind it being removed, I'm certainly not writing the new tool though.

[Kixunil]

unsure what the practical limits are and whether Github will give us a small box with scrollbars or a huge box that readers have to scroll past.

I'd use <details> for that:

API changes

very
long
API
changes
here

I'm certainly not writing the new tool though.

I could look into it but it's not a priority for me, so it can take months.

[apoelstra]

I'll take it on. I really want these API diffs and finally learned to use GA with my "weekly update compiler pin" PR.

Thanks for the tip on <details>!

[Kixunil]

Thanks for the tip on <details>!

Just note that if you want to put a code block in there you need to put empty lines around it. Otherwise it'll mess up formatting.