On 3/4/15 6:19 PM, I wrote:
> On 3/4/15 5:26 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
>> It was considered to be a bug fix; more, given the few complaints about
>> the clearly-broken old behavior, we thought it was a fix that would affect
>> few people, and them positively.
>
> Yeah, but these things usually go the other way. "This has been broken
> for 10 years but nobody noticed, so we're not going to fix this"
Sorry, that should have said "we're not going to fix this *in the back
branches*".
.m
