The discussion above still seems to suggest that version 14.20 should be
merged into the main branch, which I completely don't understand.

On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 8:03 AM Leonid Borchuk <[email protected]> wrote:

> +1 for
> + absorbing PostgreSQL 14.4 → 14.20 (and future PG14 updates) into the
> current `main` branch
> + do not freeze main branch
>
> We could decide how to simplify rebasing PG16 work later. Most likely, it
> will be enough to figure out how to exclude absorbing from PG14 commits.
>
> On Tue, Feb 10, 2026 at 3:14 PM Kirill Reshke <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 10 Feb 2026 at 15:47, Dianjin Wang <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think we need to make a final decision on this; otherwise our work
> > > will be blocked.
> > >
> > > My +1 vote is to absorb PostgreSQL 14.4 → 14.20 (and future PG14
> > > updates) into the current `main` branch first, and then cherry-pick
> > > the changes from `main` into `REL_2_STABLE`.
> >
> > I guess the only major issue here is how pg14-16 rebase would deal
> > with that. After 16 pg kernel upgrade work, we should cherry-pick all
> > commits from main to cbdb-postgres-merge branch. Well, I guess we can
> > just not do that for 14.4-14.20 commits... Looking for Jinbao Chen
> > comment here
> >
> >
> > > We should not freeze the PG version that main is based on. If main
> > > cannot continuously track upstream improvements, we lose one of the
> > > key advantages of being a PostgreSQL downstream project. In other
> > > words, `main` should remain the `upstream` for `REL_x_STABLE`, not the
> > > other way around.
> >
> > +1 on that
> >
> > > Looking forward to more voices.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Dianjin Wang
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Kirill Reshke
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to