| From: | "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jkatz(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Justin Pryzby <pryzby(at)telsasoft(dot)com>, David Steele <david(at)pgmasters(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory |
| Date: | 2022-08-10 16:41:25 |
| Message-ID: | baecd268-725f-4874-b0bf-172e69d0903e@postgresql.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8/10/22 12:32 PM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 6:20 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>
>> Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
>>> David Steele voted for back-patching this on the grounds that it would
>>> make future back-patching easier, which is an argument that seems to
>>> me to have some merit, although on the other hand, we are already into
>>> August so it's quite late in the day. Anyone else want to vote?
>>
>> Seems like low-risk refactoring, so +1 for keeping v15 close to HEAD.
>
> +1, but I suggest also getting a hat-tip from the RMT on it.
With RMT hat on, given a few folks who maintain backup utilities seem to
be in favor of backpatching to v15 and they are the ones to be most
affected by this, it seems to me that this is an acceptable,
noncontroversial course of action.
Jonathan
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2022-08-10 16:56:29 | Re: designated initializers |
| Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2022-08-10 16:32:10 | Re: moving basebackup code to its own directory |