| From: | Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Thom Brown <thom(at)linux(dot)com>, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org>, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: 10.0 |
| Date: | 2016-06-20 16:26:44 |
| Message-ID: | B074213A-475A-4BF2-9042-7DAC11BB3A6F@gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
>
> In practical effect that is exactly what your proposal does. You just feel better because you defined when B is allowed to change even though it never should happen based upon our project policy. And any rare exception can justifiably be called a bug fix because, face it, it would only happen if someone reports a bug.
Why are you refusing to acknowledge the difference between features that require a pg_upgrade and features that don't?
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Mark Dilger | 2016-06-20 16:28:02 | Re: 10.0 |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2016-06-20 16:07:53 | Re: parallel.c is not marked as test covered |