Re: Maintaining a list of pgindent commits for "git blame" to ignore

From: Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Maintaining a list of pgindent commits for "git blame" to ignore
Date: 2021-03-18 23:54:53
Message-ID: CAH2-WznWXrS9MZX7jm+RJmx1chpWi4e=+p8ZKrfEBzjBLELTnw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 4:40 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Good question. We don't have a standard about that (whether to
> do those in separate or the same commits), but we could establish one
> if it seems helpful.

I don't think that it matters too much, but it will necessitate
updating the file multiple times. It might become natural to just do
everything together in a way that it wasn't before.

The really big wins come from excluding the enormous pgindent run
commits, especially for the few historic pgindent runs where the rules
changed -- there are no more than a handful of those. They tend to
generate an enormous amount of churn that touches almost everything.
So it probably isn't necessary to worry about smaller things.

--
Peter Geoghegan

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Vik Fearing 2021-03-18 23:55:52 Re: GROUP BY DISTINCT
Previous Message Tomas Vondra 2021-03-18 23:52:17 Re: GROUP BY DISTINCT