Andrew Dunstan <andrew.duns...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 7/9/20 3:36 PM, Tom Lane wrote: >> Should we consider back-patching the CRLF filtering changes, ie >> 91bdf499b + ffb4cee43? It's not really necessary perhaps, but >> I dislike situations where the "same" test on different branches is >> testing different things. Seems like a recipe for future surprises.
> Yes please.
Done.
regards, tom lane
