RE: pg_recvlogical requires -d but not described on the documentation

Dear Fujii-san,

> Thanks for the patch! It looks good to me.
> 
> I'm considering whether to back-patch these changes to older versions.
> Since pg_recvlogical --drop-slot worked without --dbname in 9.4
> but started failing unintentionally in 9.5, it could be considered a bug.
> However, this behavior has existed for a long time without complaints or
> bug reports, and there was no clear documentation stating that
> --drop-slot should work without --dbname.
> 
> Given this, I think that also we could treat it as not a bug and apply
> the change only to the master branch. What do you think should we
> back-patch it as a bug fix or apply it only to master?

Personally considered, such a long-standing but harmless bug can be regarded as
the specification. So, I vote that this is an enhancement and be applied only to
master.

Best regards,
Hayato Kuroda
FUJITSU LIMITED