Horton

Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres@piotr-stefaniak.me>
Date: 2017-06-19T19:27:47Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> writes:
> * Robert Haas (robertmhaas@gmail.com) wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 5:41 PM, Peter Eisentraut
>> <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com> wrote:
>>> 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.

>> +1.

> +1.

Given the license issues raised downthread, we have no choice in
the short term.  So I have a request in to create a separate repo
on git.postgresql.org (whose chain do I need to pull to get that
approved, btw?)

			regards, tom lane

Commits

  1. Manually un-break a few URLs that pgindent used to insist on splitting.

  2. Remove entab and associated detritus.

  3. Phase 3 of pgindent updates.

  4. Phase 2 of pgindent updates.

  5. Initial pgindent run with pg_bsd_indent version 2.0.

  6. Adjust pgindent script to use pg_bsd_indent 2.0.

  7. Final pgindent run with old pg_bsd_indent (version 1.3).