Re: Re-indent HEAD tomorrow?

From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Re-indent HEAD tomorrow?
Date: 2017-06-22 14:38:41
Message-ID: CA+Tgmobcj05OVh8MeHsOq-_EEN7HtbohuPjJtxAdeeH9gwNadg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Right now we're really just speculating about how much pain there will
> be, on either end of this. So it'd be interesting for somebody who's
> carrying large out-of-tree patches (EDB? Citus?) to try the new
> pgindent version on a back branch and see how much of their patches no
> longer apply afterwards.

EDB is not continuously reapplying patches; we have branches into
which the upstream reindents would have to be merged. As a broad
statement, reindenting all of the back branches is surely going to
create some extra work for whoever has to do those merges, but if
that's what the community thinks is best, we will of course manage.
It's not *that* bad.

It would be slightly less annoying for us, I think, if the reindent
were done immediately after a minor-release rather than at some other
random point in time.

--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2017-06-22 14:48:25 Re: Multiple TO version in ALTER EXTENSION UPDATE
Previous Message Alexander Korotkov 2017-06-22 14:36:49 Re: Pluggable storage