Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> 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.

It adds an extra step to what a developer has to do to get pgindent
up and running, so it doesn't seem to me like it's helping the goal
of reducing the setup overhead.

regards, tom lane