On 07/14/2015 10:29 AM, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Heikki Linnakangas wrote:
>> I plan to commit the attached patches later today or tomorrow. But how do
>> you feel about back-patching this? It should be possible to backpatch,
>> although at a quick test it seems that there have been small changes to the
>> affected code in many versions, so it would require some work. Also, in
>> back-branches we'd need to put the new AT_ReAddComment type to the end of
>> the list, like we've done when we added AT_ReAddConstraint in 9.3. I'm
>> inclined to backpatch this to 9.5 only, even though this is clearly a bug
>> fix, on the grounds that it's not a very serious bug and there's always some
>> risk in backpatching.
>
> Well, while it's clearly a bug I don't think that it is worth the risk
> to destabilize back branches older than 9.5 in this code path. So +1
> for doing it the way you are suggesting. We could still revisit that
> later on if there are more complaints, but I doubt there will be much.
Ok, committed to master and 9.5. Thanks!
- Heikki
