On Thu, Sep 8, 2022 at 12:51 PM Pavel Stehule <pavel.stehule@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Does anyone want to advocate for backpatching these missing ranges to >> v12 and up? v12 still has a table in-line so trivial to remedy, but >> v13 and up use a script, so these exceptions would likely have to use >> hard-coded branches to keep from bringing in new changes. >> >> If so, does anyone want to advocate for including this patch in v15? >> It claims Unicode 14.0.0, and this would make that claim more >> technically correct as well as avoiding additional branches. > > > I think it can be fixed just in v15 and master. This issue has no impact on SQL.
Well, if the regressions from v11 are not important enough to backpatch, there is not as much of a case to backpatch the full fix to v15 either.
This is not a critical issue, really. On second thought, I don't see the point in releasing fresh Postgres with this bug, where there is know bugfix - and this bugfix should be compatible (at this moment) with 16.
