Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 12, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Alvaro Herrera
> <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> > Is this a backpatchable bug fix, or are we considering this only for the
> > master branch?
>
> It would be good to get that backpatched, that's something we really
> miss now IMO. Now it modifies libpgcommon, so Windows packagers (me
> being one) will certainly need to patch a bit stuff but that's a
> one-line changer so it's not a big deal. And I imagine that this is
> actually the reason why Asif reported that as a bug as well.
I think it'd be better to patch only pg_upgrade in back branches, so
that there are no libpgcommon changes. Seems that would make life
easier for packagers (See the \connect thread, where Robert opined that
it'd be better to duplicate some routines in back branches rather than
refactor libpq code and move the common code to pgcommon. I didn't
completely agree with him at the time, but now that you mention
packagers pain, maybe he has a point.)
So let's do the refactoring in the master branch only, and duplicate
the code in back branches. Nasty, but it seems the more robust
approach.
--
Álvaro Herrera http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
