Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net> writes:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 10:51:01AM -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
>> I'd vote for backpatching, but only as far as 8.2, seeing that we're
>> abandoning the older branches on Windows.
> Should we backpatch a version of it to previous versions that does just the
> error stack manipulation, or just ignore on the grounds that nobody has
> reported the problem there (it's there, but it's a lot more narrow - I know
> it's there, but I havent' been able to provoket it due to not knowing
> enough about setting up certificate chains and such)
That's only a cosmetic problem (wrong error message), right? I'd vote
for no backpatch, at least for now --- I'd rather see this change get
through beta testing first. Anytime you're fooling with interactions
with some other package, the risk of portability issues is high.
regards, tom lane