On Fri, Jun 7, 2019 at 6:02 PM Ian Barwick <ian.barw...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > On 6/7/19 9:00 PM, Michael Paquier wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 07, 2019 at 03:44:14PM +0900, Masahiko Sawada wrote: > > Or is that not worth bothering except on HEAD? Thoughts? > > Personally I don't think it's that critical, but not bothered either way. > Presumably no-one has complained so far anyway (I only chanced upon the > missing > GUC description because I was poking about looking for examples of custom > GUC handling...)
I think it worth maintaining consistent documentation and GUC descriptions in back branches. So, I'm +1 for backpatching. I'm going to commit all 3 patches (documentation, GUC description, documentation indentation) on no objections. ------ Alexander Korotkov Postgres Professional: http://www.postgrespro.com The Russian Postgres Company
