"Kevin Grittner" <Kevin.Grittner@wicourts.gov> writes:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I think if I had to pick a proposal, I'd say we should disable #2
>>> for the specific case of casting a composite type to something
>>> else.
>> Well, then let's do that. It's not the exact fix I'd pick, but
>> it's clearly better than nothing, so I'm willing to sign on to it
>> as a compromise position.
> So, I'd rather scrap #2 entirely; but if that really would break
> much working code, +1 for ignoring it when it would cast a composite
> to something else.
Well, assuming for the sake of argument that we have consensus on fixing
it like that, is this something we should just do in HEAD, or should we
back-patch into 8.4 and 9.0? We'll be hearing about it nigh
indefinitely if we don't, but on the other hand this isn't the kind of
thing we like to change in released branches.
regards, tom lane
