| From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres(at)piotr-stefaniak(dot)me> |
| Subject: | Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation |
| Date: | 2017-05-19 16:21:52 |
| Message-ID: | CA+TgmoYXsn6=664yUp90y-Xt8ZUD7uh19naybjJBaqO-KDUOCQ@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> I certainly would rather that our version matched something that's under
> active maintenance someplace. But it seems like there are two good
> arguments for having a copy in our tree:
>
> * easy accessibility for PG developers
>
> * at any given time we need to be using a specific "blessed" version,
> so that all developers can get equivalent results. There's pretty much
> no chance of that happening if we depend on distro-provided packages,
> even if those share a common upstream.
Yeah, but those advantages could also be gained by putting the
pgindent tree on git.postgresql.org in a separate repository. Having
it in the same repository as the actual PostgreSQL code is not
required nor, in my opinion, particularly desirable.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2017-05-19 16:30:08 | Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation |
| Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 2017-05-19 16:10:55 | Re: [ANNOUNCE] PostgreSQL 10 Beta 1 Released! |