Re: Re-order "disable_on_error" in tab-complete COMPLETE_WITH - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Amit Kapila
Subject Re: Re-order "disable_on_error" in tab-complete COMPLETE_WITH
Date
Msg-id CAA4eK1KA=HJE24gSE-xJ3wmh_Gb9kvM1mQCZbk0Z1DwAMd7u4Q@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Re-order "disable_on_error" in tab-complete COMPLETE_WITH  (Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com>)
Responses RE: Re-order "disable_on_error" in tab-complete COMPLETE_WITH
Re: Re-order "disable_on_error" in tab-complete COMPLETE_WITH
List pgsql-hackers
On Tue, Jul 5, 2022 at 4:03 AM Peter Smith <smithpb2250@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2022 at 10:29 PM Euler Taveira <euler@eulerto.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 4, 2022, at 5:37 AM, Amit Kapila wrote:
> >
> > Yeah, it seems we have overlooked this point. I think we can do this
> > just for HEAD but as the feature is introduced in PG-15 so there is no
> > harm in pushing it to PG-15 as well especially because it is a
> > straightforward change. What do you or others think?
> >
> > No objection. It is a good thing for future backpatches.
> >
>
> Since there is no function change or bugfix here I thought it was only
> applicable for HEAD. This change is almost in the same category as a
> code comment typo patch - do those normally get backpatched? - maybe
> follow the same convention here. OTOH, if you think it may be helpful
> for future backpatches then I am also fine if you wanted to push it to
> PG15.
>

It can help if there is any bug-fix in the same code path or if some
other code adjustment in the same area is required in the back branch.
I feel the chances of both are less but I just wanted to keep the code
consistent for such a possibility. Anyway, I'll wait for a day or so
and see if anyone has objections to it.

-- 
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Michael Paquier
Date:
Subject: Re: CFM Manager
Next
From: Thomas Munro
Date:
Subject: Re: AIX support - alignment issues