Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> On 2023-04-07 15:32:12 +0200, Daniel Gustafsson wrote:
>> I don't think we should go ahead with a patch that refactors interactive_psql
>> only to SKIP over it in CI (which is what the tab_completion test does now),
>> so
>> let's wait until we have that sorted before going ahead.
> Maybe I am a bit confused, but isn't that just an existing requirement? Why
> would we expect this patchset to change what dependencies use of
> interactive_psql() has?
It is an existing requirement, but only for a test that's not too
critical. If interactive_psql starts getting used for more interesting
things, we might be sad that the coverage is weak.
Having said that, weak coverage is better than no coverage. I don't
think this point should be a show-stopper for committing.
regards, tom lane
