Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2018-01-05 18:57:55 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 03:51:15PM -0800, Andres Freund wrote:
>>> Also, leaving translatability aside, why was *any* of this backpatched?
>> Tom has preferred that I backpatch all safe patches so we keep that code
>> consistent so we can backpatch other things more easily.
> I've a hard time believing this. Tom?
I've been known to back-patch stuff just to keep branches consistent,
but it's always a judgement call. In this case I wouldn't have done it
(even if the patch were a good idea in HEAD) because it would cause
churn in translatable messages in the back branches. Also, the case
for cosmetic back-patching is only strong when a particular file is
already pretty similar across all branches, and I'm not sure that
holds for pg_upgrade.
regards, tom lane
