Aleksander Alekseev <aleksan...@timescale.com> writes:
>> I named the flag CUSTOMPATH_SUPPORT_PROJECTION similar to the other
>> custom node flags, but this would revert the current logic
> This seems to be a typical Kobayashi Maru situation, i.e any choice is
> a bad one. I suggest keeping the patch as is and hoping that the
> developers of existing extensions read the release notes.
Yeah, I concur that's the least bad choice.
I got annoyed by the fact that the existing checks of CustomPath flags
had several randomly different styles for basically identical tests,
and this patch wanted to introduce yet another. I cleaned that up and
pushed this.
regards, tom lane
