On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera
<alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
> Michael Paquier wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Michael Paquier <michael.paquier@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> I have looked for now at the first patch and finished with the
>> >> attached while looking at it. Perhaps a committer could look already
>> >> at that?
>> >
>> > It looks fine to me except that I think we should spell out "param" as
>> > "parameter" throughout, instead of abbreviating.
>>
>> Fine for me. I have updated the first patch as attached (still looking
>> at the second).
>
> hm, so this is to backpatch, not merely for master, yes?
I haven't thought about that as it is a cosmetic patch.. But yes
that's harmless to backpatch to 9.5, and it would actually be good to
get a consistent code base with master I guess.
--
Michael