Michael Paquier <mich...@paquier.xyz> writes: > As that's really cosmetic, I would just change that on HEAD, or > perhaps others feel differently?
+1 for a HEAD-only change. I think the only really good arguments
for back-patching would be if this were causing compiler warnings
(but we've seen none) or if we thought it would likely lead to
hazards for back-patching future bug fixes (but the adjacent lines
seem unlikely to change).
regards, tom lane
