Re: Splitting up guc.c

Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>

From: Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker <ilmari@ilmari.org>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>, Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>, pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Date: 2022-09-12T20:12:03Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:

>> I think this is localized enough that asking people to manually resolve a
>> conflict around adding a GUC entry wouldn't be asking for that much. And I
>> think plenty changes might be automatically resolvable, despite the rename.
>
> I wonder whether git will be able to figure out that this is mostly a
> code move.  I would expect so for a straight file rename, but will that
> work when we're splitting the file 3 ways?

Git can detect more complicated code movement (see the `--color-moved`
option to `git diff`), but I'm not sure it's clever enough to realise
that a change modifying a block of code that was moved in the meanwhile
should be applied at the new destination.

> 			regards, tom lane

- ilmari



Commits

  1. Split up guc.c for better build speed and ease of maintenance.