Dean, * Dean Rasheed (dean.a.rash...@gmail.com) wrote: > On 26 September 2017 at 00:42, Stephen Frost <sfr...@snowman.net> wrote: > > That's a relatively minor point, however, and I do feel that this patch > > is a definite improvement. Were you thinking of just applying this for > > v10, or back-patching all or part of it..? > > I was planning on back-patching it to 9.5, taking out the parts > relating the restrictive policies as appropriate. Currently the 9.5 > and 9.6 docs are identical, as are 10 and HEAD, and 9.5/9.6 only > differs from 10/HEAD in a couple of places where they mention > restrictive policies. IMO we should stick to that, making any > improvements available in the back-branches. I was also thinking the > same about the new summary table, although I haven't properly reviewed > that yet.
Makes sense to me. +1 Thanks! Stephen
Description: Digital signature