Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> David Steele voted for back-patching this on the grounds that it would
> make future back-patching easier, which is an argument that seems to
> me to have some merit, although on the other hand, we are already into
> August so it's quite late in the day. Anyone else want to vote?
Seems like low-risk refactoring, so +1 for keeping v15 close to HEAD.
regards, tom lane