Hi, On Sat, 6 Jun 2026 at 03:35, Daniel Gustafsson <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 5 Jun 2026, at 23:05, Nathan Bossart <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Sat, Jun 06, 2026 at 12:57:56AM +0530, Ayush Tiwari wrote: > >> Thoughts? Does this look like the right approach, or is there a > >> reason to keep refint around? > > > > +1. Do we need an appendix-obsolete entry for the docs? > > Seems like a reasonable thing to add. Once merged, we should probably add > (and > backpatch) a mention to the docs that the functionality will be removed in > v20. > As you suggested, here's the back-branch doc change noting that refint will be removed in v20, pointing users to the built-in foreign key functionality. I extended the existing paragraph (following the xml2/intagg deprecation style) rather than adding a separate note. Intended for back-patch to all supported branches (13-19). Thoughts? Regards, Ayush
v1-0001-Add-note-that-refint-will-be-removed-in-v20.patch
Description: Binary data
