On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 3:39 PM Mark Dilger
<mark.dilger@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> Since there hasn't been any agreement on that point, I've just rebased the patch to apply cleanly against the current
master:
This looks OK to me. There may be better ways to do some of it, but
there's no rule against further improving the code later. Also, since
the issue was introduced in v14, we probably shouldn't wait forever to
do something about it. However, there is a procedural issue here now
that we are past feature freeze. I think someone could defensibly take
any of the following positions:
(A) This is a new feature. Wait for v16.
(B) This is a bug fix. Commit it now and back-patch to v14.
(C) This is a cleanup that is OK to put into v15 even after feature
freeze but since it is a behavior change we shouldn't back-patch it.
I vote for (C). What do other people think?
--
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
