| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari(at)ilmari(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: perltidy version |
| Date: | 2018-03-02 14:53:41 |
| Message-ID: | 25852.1520002421@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org> writes:
> Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> In that case, we should at least update our instructions for how to install
>> it. But that's definitely a better option than hosting our own copy.
> But surely the idea of updating the version to use should be considered
> further? Maybe they have even improved the output ;-) Has anyone
> looked?
+1. We're not that far away from it being time to run pgindent/perltidy,
so now would be a good time to consider whether we like a newer version's
result better.
If we do decide to stick on the old version, then yes, improve the
pointer.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2018-03-02 15:01:13 | Re: perltidy version |
| Previous Message | David Steele | 2018-03-02 14:53:24 | Re: Re: reorganizing partitioning code |