| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Run pgindent now? |
| Date: | 2015-05-22 15:09:32 |
| Message-ID: | 5296.1432307372@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> Robert Haas wrote:
>> On Tue, May 19, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>>> To do it before every minor release would require re-indenting HEAD
>>> as well (since the whole point is to keep HEAD and the back branches
>>> consistent). I think we'd get too much push-back from developers
>>> whose pending patches got broken. We can get away with reindenting
>>> HEAD between development cycles, but probably not more often than that.
>> I'm not convinced of that. If we did it more often, it might actually
>> be less disruptive.
> I believe it's possible to mechanically rebase a patch over an indent
> run of the underlying branch with half a dozen commands or less. +1 for
> reindenting all branches before each minor release, FWIW.
Yeah? Can you show an example?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2015-05-22 15:21:50 | Re: Add a hint when postgresql.conf hot_standby = 'off' and recovery.conf standby = 'on' |
| Previous Message | Alvaro Herrera | 2015-05-22 14:52:34 | Re: Run pgindent now? |