Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.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.
regards, tom lane
