Re: Ordering of header file inclusion

On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 10:58 PM vignesh C <vignesh21(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 4:44 PM Amit Kapila <amit(dot)kapila16(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > I haven't reviewed it completely, but generally, the changes seem to
> > be fine. Please see if you can be consistent in extra space between
> > includes. Kindly check the same throughout the patch.
> >
> Thanks for reviewing the patch.
> I have made an updated patch with comments you have suggested.
> I have split the patch into 3 patches so that the review can be simpler.
> This patch also includes the changes suggested by Peter & Andres.
> I had just seen seen Tom Lane's suggestions regarding submodule header
> file, this patch contains fix based on Andres suggestions. Let me know
> if that need to be changed, I can update it.
>

AFAICS, none of Andres or Tom seems to be in favor of separating
module headers. I am also not sure if we should try to make sure of
that in every case.

> Should we make this changes only in master branch or should we make in
> back branches also.
>

I am in favor of doing this only for HEAD, but I am fine if others
want to see for back branches as well and you can prepare the patches
for the same.

--
With Regards,
Amit Kapila.
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com