Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> I don't see why an upgrading aid would be worthy of back-patching, but
> not a debugging aid. I'd certainly prioritize those in the other
> order.
I think the sort of upgrading aid Peter has in mind is the kind where
it's entirely useless if it's not back-patched, because it has to run in
the pre-upgraded server. We've discussed such things before in the
context of in-place upgrade, though I believe there have been no actual
instances as yet.
I'm not really sure why we're even considering the notion of
back-patching this item. Doing so would not fit with any past practice
or agreed-on project management practices, not even under our lax
standards for contrib (and I keep hearing people claim that contrib
is or should be as trustworthy as core, anyway). Since when do we
back-patch significant features that have not been through a beta test
cycle?
regards, tom lane
