On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 09:49:34PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote:
> In v4, Peter posted a 2-patch series with my patch as 001.
> But I pointed out that it's better to fix the initialization of the
> compile-time GUCs rather than exclude them from the check.
> Then Peter submitted v5 whcih does that, and isn't built on top of my
> patch.
Okidoki, thanks for the clarification.
--
Michael