On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 09:49:34PM -0500, Justin Pryzby wrote: > In v4, Peter posted a 2-patch series with my patch as 001. > But I pointed out that it's better to fix the initialization of the > compile-time GUCs rather than exclude them from the check. > Then Peter submitted v5 whcih does that, and isn't built on top of my > patch.
Okidoki, thanks for the clarification. -- Michael
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
