| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvaro(dot)herrera(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Boris Kolpackov <boris(at)codesynthesis(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add version macro to libpq-fe.h |
| Date: | 2021-06-21 16:34:00 |
| Message-ID: | 1650037.1624293240@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> On 21 Jun 2021, at 17:27, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>> What will prevent us from forgetting to do something about this again,
>> a year from now?
> An entry in a release checklist could perhaps be an idea?
Yeah, I was wondering if adding an entry to RELEASE_CHANGES would be
helpful. Again, I'm not sure that this coding rule is much more
likely to be violated than any other. On the other hand, the fact
that it's not critical until we approach release does suggest that
maybe it'd be useful to treat it as a checklist item.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tomas Vondra | 2021-06-21 16:42:20 | Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2021-06-21 16:31:14 | Re: disfavoring unparameterized nested loops |