| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Jelte Fennema <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
| Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Jesse Zhang <sbjesse(at)gmail(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner |
| Date: | 2023-01-20 17:09:05 |
| Message-ID: | 531251.1674234545@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jelte Fennema <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> writes:
> To me a master branch that pgindent never complains about sounds
> amazing! And I personally think rejection of unindented pushes and
> cfbot complaining about unindented patches would be a very good thing,
> because that seems to be the only solution that could achieve that.
The core problem here is that requiring that would translate to
requiring every code contributor to have a working copy of pg_bsd_indent.
Maybe that's not a huge lift, but it'd be YA obstacle to new contributors,
and we don't need any more of those.
Yeah, if we switched to some other tool maybe we could reduce the size
of that problem. But as Bruce replied, we've not found another one that
(a) can be coaxed to make output comparable to what we're accustomed to
and (b) seems decently well maintained.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Vladimir Sitnikov | 2023-01-20 17:11:56 | Re: Experiments with Postgres and SSL |
| Previous Message | Shawn Debnath | 2023-01-20 17:00:18 | Re: SLRUs in the main buffer pool, redux |