On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Alvaro Herrera <alvhe...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: > Michael Paquier wrote: >> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 6:10 AM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 7:25 AM, Michael Paquier >> > <michael.paqu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I have looked for now at the first patch and finished with the >> >> attached while looking at it. Perhaps a committer could look already >> >> at that? >> > >> > It looks fine to me except that I think we should spell out "param" as >> > "parameter" throughout, instead of abbreviating. >> >> Fine for me. I have updated the first patch as attached (still looking >> at the second). > > hm, so this is to backpatch, not merely for master, yes?
I haven't thought about that as it is a cosmetic patch.. But yes that's harmless to backpatch to 9.5, and it would actually be good to get a consistent code base with master I guess. -- Michael -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
