Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>,
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>,
"pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
Piotr Stefaniak <postgres@piotr-stefaniak.me>
Date: 2017-06-18T15:42:14Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > On 6/16/17 10:51, Tom Lane wrote: >> So I'm back to the position that we ought to stick the indent >> code under src/tools/ in our main repo. Is anyone really >> seriously against that? > I think it would be better to have it separate. > Other than for reasons of principle and general modularity of the world, > I would like this to be available separately for separate download, > packaging, etc. to it can be applied to extension projects without > having to download and build (a specific version of) PostgreSQL. The > code formatting in extension projects is, um, questionable. In fact, if > it's a better indent period, I would like to package it for the general > public. Well, the direction I'm headed in for addressing the portability issues is to make it depend on the usual PG build environment, notably c.h and libpgport. If we don't want it in-tree, it can be built using PGXS, but it'll still require a PG installation somewhere in order to get built. Making it independent of both FreeBSD and PG is a significantly larger project, and one I don't personally intend to tackle. (And, if someone does tackle that, I don't exactly see why having our own copy in-tree would stop them.) However ... off-list discussion with Piotr indicates that he's unwilling to touch the license text without permission from FreeBSD core and/or legal teams. While the 4-clause license is certainly no impediment to using indent, we don't want any such text in our tree, so that seems like a showstopper, at least until the license question is resolved. Accordingly, I'll proceed with setting up a repo for it on git.postgresql.org. > If the vote is to put it into the tree, I would request not to do it in > PG10. At this point, we should be winding things down and not open up > new areas of activity. I'm confused by this. Are you objecting to switching to the new indent version for v10? regards, tom lane
Commits
-
Manually un-break a few URLs that pgindent used to insist on splitting.
- 780b3a4c43fd 10.0 landed
-
Remove entab and associated detritus.
- 81f056c7256f 10.0 landed
-
Phase 3 of pgindent updates.
- 382ceffdf7f6 10.0 landed
-
Phase 2 of pgindent updates.
- c7b8998ebbf3 10.0 landed
-
Initial pgindent run with pg_bsd_indent version 2.0.
- e3860ffa4dd0 10.0 landed
-
Adjust pgindent script to use pg_bsd_indent 2.0.
- 8ff6d4ec7840 10.0 landed
-
Final pgindent run with old pg_bsd_indent (version 1.3).
- 9ef2dbefc7fb 10.0 landed