From: | Mark Dilger <hornschnorter(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: pgindent run next week? |
Date: | 2019-05-22 18:54:29 |
Message-ID: | CAE-h2Tr6NgsyABFYgzM3-xme8bk_wiJxW-Qm7ZtzN0d0366RZA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 10:07 AM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> I wrote:
> > Hearing no objections, I'll plan on running pgindent tomorrow sometime.
>
> And done.
>
> > The new underlying pg_bsd_indent (2.1) is available now from
> > https://git.postgresql.org/git/pg_bsd_indent.git
>
> Please update your local copy if you have one.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
I cloned, built and used the new pg_bsd_indent to format my fork of
PostgreSQL 11 (not the 9.1 or 9.5 forks I previously mentioned) and
it caused me no problems whatsoever. I don't have a strong preference,
but I would vote in favor of running pgindent on the back branches
rather than against, since to the extent that I might need to move
patches between forks of different versions, it will be easier to do if
they have the same indentation. (In practice, this probably won't
come up for me, since the older forks are defunct and unlikely to
be patched by me.)
mark
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Peter Eisentraut | 2019-05-22 19:06:19 | Re: "long" type is not appropriate for counting tuples |
Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2019-05-22 18:48:19 | Re: pg_dump throwing "column number -1 is out of range 0..36" on HEAD |