Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
Cc: Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz>, Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage
Date: 2019-07-16 23:26:59
Message-ID: 22196.1563319619@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> writes:
> They don't preclude each other though. E.g. it'd be sensible to have both

>> Per gripe from Ken Tanzer. Back-patch to 9.6. The issue exists
>> further back, but before 9.6 the code looks very different and it
>> doesn't actually know whether the "var" name matches anything,
>> so I desisted from trying to fix it.

> and "Backpatch: 9.6-" or such.

I've wondered for some time what you think the "-" means in this.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andres Freund 2019-07-16 23:33:07 Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage
Previous Message Andres Freund 2019-07-16 23:22:07 Re: A little report on informal commit tag usage