| From: | Jelte Fennema <postgres(at)jeltef(dot)nl> |
|---|---|
| To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Peter Geoghegan <pg(at)bowt(dot)ie>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Noah Misch <noah(at)leadboat(dot)com>, Jesse Zhang <sbjesse(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner |
| Date: | 2023-01-24 11:44:00 |
| Message-ID: | CAGECzQTqoGHrePM_pwmhaM+J1XOygYjzFod4sf=PAt7J4A19Mw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> One issue on requiring patches to have run pgindent previously is
> actually the typedef list. If someone adds a typedef in a commit, they
> will see different pgident output in the committed files, and perhaps
> others, and the new typedefs might only appear after the commit, causing
> later commits to not match.
I'm not sure I understand the issue you're pointing out. If someone
changes the typedef list, imho they want the formatting to change
because of that. So requiring an addition to the typedef list to also
commit reindentation to all files that this typedef indirectly impacts
seems pretty reasonable to me.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Takamichi Osumi (Fujitsu) | 2023-01-24 12:19:04 | RE: Time delayed LR (WAS Re: logical replication restrictions) |
| Previous Message | Amit Kapila | 2023-01-24 11:40:41 | Re: Test failures of 100_bugs.pl |