Re: DOCS - Clarify the publication 'publish_via_partition_root' default value.
| От | Jacob Champion |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: DOCS - Clarify the publication 'publish_via_partition_root' default value. |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAOYmi+naTW+G6p4K81RBtebdeBnJHV6ZGo-FA1e2PGU1a7H9MA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: DOCS - Clarify the publication 'publish_via_partition_root' default value. (Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: DOCS - Clarify the publication 'publish_via_partition_root' default value.
Re: DOCS - Clarify the publication 'publish_via_partition_root' default value. |
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 1:08 PM David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com> wrote: > Presently it’s the same criteria as for the code - things deemed bug fixes get back-patched; pure enhancements do not. Well, okay. Bear with me a moment because I need to calibrate to the community norms. Is the consensus that this is not a "bug fix"? Because I know what the feature does, but I cannot understand the current paragraph without rereading it several times. On Wed, Dec 17, 2025 at 8:18 PM Amit Kapila <amit.kapila16@gmail.com> wrote: > It depends if there is a wrong explanation then it makes sense to > backpatch but as this is a wording improvement, it should be okay to > commit it as HEAD-only patch. I know it's okay, but I *want* to backpatch, and I would have yesterday except for your email. Does that raise concerns or cause problems in practice? (Should I drop this as not a battle really worth having? Clearly nothing is exploding; I just don't get why docs contributors have to wait ten months for improvements to land if everyone says "oh yeah, that's better.") > Would you like to take care of this? Yes. Thanks, --Jacob
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: