Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> I do not mind taking the approach as a prudent and careful thing, >> but I want the question answered regardless, as I know Jonathan is >> in a good position to tell if this is just a theoretical issue than >> I am, and depending on the answer, we may rethink the approach of >> trying to be overly careful. > > From what I see, this is just a theoretical issue for now. (I spotted it > while looking at the code, not because of a bug report.) If there is no actual damage, then probably the earlier "let's be extra careful" Dscho mentioned may equally have been us being unnecessarily cautious. Assuming that you didn't apply this patch to the internal version you ship to your developers---if you did, then we truly gained no data from this exchange because the original tightening had no chance to even cause the damage. In any case, let's merge the loosening patch down to 'maint'. Thanks for being careful. .
