Re: 10.0
Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com>
From: Mark Dilger <hornschnorter@gmail.com>
To: "David G. Johnston" <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>,
Craig Ringer <craig@2ndquadrant.com>,
Greg Stark <stark@mit.edu>,
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>,
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>,
PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>,
Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>,
David Fetter <david@fetter.org>,
Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@bluetreble.com>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Date: 2016-06-20T16:26:44Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> > In practical effect that is exactly what your proposal does. You just feel better because you defined when B is allowed to change even though it never should happen based upon our project policy. And any rare exception can justifiably be called a bug fix because, face it, it would only happen if someone reports a bug. Why are you refusing to acknowledge the difference between features that require a pg_upgrade and features that don't?