On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 5:49 PM, Greg Smith <g...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > I was never arguing in favor of touching anything in the back branches; if > you recall I didn't even voice an opinion here until I got concerned about > too many changes happening in them. I think a proper fix in 9.0 combined > with a release notes comment noting the old/new behavior, so it's clear what > was broken in the old versions, would be quite enough here.
OK, commit done in head, with a note that we're deliberately not touching the back-branches and should release-note the change. Open item removed, also. > Thanks for following this through, I think it's a useful small bit to get > sorted out fully. yw -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
