Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Robert Haas
Subject Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions
Date
Msg-id CA+Tgmob0V3dJ57vKL1iouk1oLMFn-60eAUQ+ab6=1BDG7ZC8iw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Responses Re: pg_dump versus ancient server versions  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On Fri, Dec 3, 2021 at 1:30 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> What's most likely to happen IMO is that committers will just start
> back-patching essential portability fixes into out-of-support-but-
> still-in-the-buildability-window branches, contemporaneously with
> the original fix.  Yeah, that does mean more committer effort,
> but only for a very small number of patches.

I agree. I think that's exactly what we want to have happen, and if a
given policy won't have exactly this result then the policy needs
adjusting.

-- 
Robert Haas
EDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: The "char" type versus non-ASCII characters
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: keepliaves etc. as environment variables