From: | Jelte Fennema-Nio <me(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se>, Florents Tselai <florents(dot)tselai(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>, Nazir Bilal Yavuz <byavuz81(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: CI: Add task that runs pgindent |
Date: | 2025-10-21 14:49:15 |
Message-ID: | CAGECzQTUh7Xki2aKCswfswFfrn08ymjrtZVCGjPFawp2fLCqOg@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 at 16:40, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Daniel Gustafsson <daniel(at)yesql(dot)se> writes:
> > Conforming to indentation rules in v1 of a patchset isn't the most interesting
> > aspect of a submission, especially for WIP and POC style patches.
>
> I have a more concrete argument: sometimes, it's helpful to submit
> an un-pgindent'd patch because correct indentation will require
> reindenting a large amount of existing code (because of addition or
> removal of a layer of braces). Showing the effects of that in a
> patch meant for review only makes the reviewer's life harder.
> So I think there is plenty of room for workflows where the committer
> is expected to reindent just before commit.
Interesting, but yeah that makes sense.
> That's not to say that it couldn't be helpful for CI to point out
> the need for indent. It's just to say that the test mustn't get
> set up so that other tests don't run, or so that it looks like
> there is any severe problem. That leads me to think it ought to be
> a separate task.
Makes sense. By having it be a separate job I can easily make the
cfbot and commitfest app report it as "yellow" instead of "red" if
this job fails.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Xuneng Zhou | 2025-10-21 14:52:39 | Re: Fix lag columns in pg_stat_replication not advancing when replay LSN stalls |
Previous Message | Tomas Vondra | 2025-10-21 14:43:08 | Re: Optimizing ResouceOwner to speed up COPY |