On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 7:26 PM Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 04:43:18PM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:45 AM Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 08:47:14AM +0530, Amit Kapila wrote:
> > > > Your changes look fine to me on the first read. I will push this to
> > > > HEAD unless there are any objections. If we want them in
> > > > back-branches, we might want to probably segregate the changes based
> > > > on the branch until those apply.
> > >
> > > +1. It would be nice to back-patch the user-visible changes in the
> > > docs.
> > >
> >
> > Fair enough, Justin, is it possible for you to segregate the changes
> > that can be backpatched?
>
> Looks like the whole patch can be applied to master and v12 [0].
>
If we decide to backpatch, then why not try to backpatch as far as
possible (till 9.5)? If so, then it would be better to separate
changes which can be backpatched till 9.5, if that is tedious, then
maybe we can just back-patch (in 12) bloom.sgml change as a separate
commit and rest commit it in HEAD only. What do you think?
--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
