From: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Michael Paquier <michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> |
Cc: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-committers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: pgsql: Introduce bloom_filter_size for BRIN bloom opclass |
Date: | 2023-07-03 02:18:41 |
Message-ID: | 74782c07-7e23-9f3b-a247-f468667b3dc0@dunslane.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-committers |
On 2023-07-02 Su 20:30, Tom Lane wrote:
> Michael Paquier<michael(at)paquier(dot)xyz> writes:
>> koel has failed its indent step after these commits. I am unsure
>> whether you need to fix this as it does not seem that we have a
>> consensus to automate that, just FYI.
> Well, *somebody* has to fix it, otherwise why did we set up the animal?
> But the impression I had was that a majority of committers want to
> start keeping the tree pgindent-clean.
>
>
I think we need to spell out expectations more clearly. Here's what I
said to Tomas in a private message:
I think the expectation is that, while there might be cases where
you want to make some commits and then indent afterwards, so the
changes are clear, for most cases you should try to commit
pre-indented patches.
But that's just my opinion. I think we need to spell it out more formally.
cheers
andrew
--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Noah Misch | 2023-07-03 03:57:31 | Re: pgsql: Fix search_path to a safe value during maintenance operations. |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2023-07-03 02:02:20 | pgsql: Refactor some code related to wait events "BufferPin" and "Exten |