On Fri, Sep 03, 2021 at 01:56:50PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote: > On 2021-Sep-03, John Naylor wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 1:46 PM Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org> > > wrote: > > > > > > On 2021-Sep-03, John Naylor wrote: > > > These catversion bumps in branch 14 this late in the cycle seem suspect. > > > Didn't we have some hesitation to push multirange unnest around beta2 > > > precisely because of a desire to avoid catversion bumps? > > > > This was for correcting a mistake (although the first commit turned out to > > be a mistake itself), so I understood it to be necessary. > > A crazy idea might have been to return to the original value.
+1. I think the catversion usually is always increased even in a "revert", but in this exceptional case [0] it would be nice if beta4/rc1 had the same number as b3. [0] two commits close to each other, with no other catalog changes, and with the specific goal of allowing trivial upgrade from b3. -- Justin
