On 12.06.25 05:23, Hayato Kuroda (Fujitsu) wrote:
>> +1 to focusing on the 0001 patch.
>>
>> Since this isn't a bug fix, I'm not sure back-patching is strictly necessary.
>> That said, it does improve consistency and test coverage, e.g., by adding checks
>> like help text length, so I'd be fine with back-patching if others see value in it.
>
> Initially I thought this was helpful even for back branches, but it is not
> 100% needed.
> No objections even if it is only applied to master - it can check new features in
> future.
committed
