On Sun, Apr 23, 2023 at 3:36 PM Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: > > On 23 Apr 2023, at 13:59, Alexander Korotkov <aekorot...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Fri, Apr 21, 2023 at 2:21 PM Pavel Borisov <pashkin.e...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > >>> On Fri, 21 Apr 2023 at 15:14, Daniel Gustafsson <dan...@yesql.se> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 21 Apr 2023, at 12:58, Anton Voloshin <a.volos...@postgrespro.ru> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> On 21/04/2023 13:45, Pavel Borisov wrote: > >>>>> The patch is attached. Anyone to commit? > >>>> > >>>> Speaking of duplicates, I just found another one: > >>>>> break; > >>>>> break; > >>>> in src/interfaces/ecpg/preproc/variable.c > >>>> (in all stable branches). > >>> > >>> Indeed, coming in via 086cf1458 it's over a decade old. > >>> > >>>> Additional patch attached. Or both could go in the same commit, it's up > >>>> to committer. > >>> > >>> I'll take care of these in a bit (unless someone finds more, or objects) > >>> backpatching them to their respective origins branches. > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Daniel Gustafsson > >> Technically patches 0001 and 0002 in the thread above don't form > >> patchset i.e. 0002 will not apply over 0001. Fixed this in v2. > >> (They could be merged into one but as they fix completely unrelated > >> things, I think a better way to commit them separately.) > > > > I wonder if we should backpatch this. On the one hand, this is not > > critical, and we may skip backpatching. On the other hand, > > backpatching will evade unnecessary code differences between major > > versions and potentially simplify further backpatching. > > > > I would prefer backpathing. Other opinions? > > I had planned to backpatch these two fixes for just that reason, to avoid the > risk for other backpatches not applying.
OK. I'm good with this plan. ------ Regards, Alexander Korotkov
