Horton

Re: Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>

View thread View on postgr.es
From: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, Piotr Stefaniak <postgres@piotr-stefaniak.me>
Date: 2017-05-19T16:21:52Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers 
On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> I certainly would rather that our version matched something that's under
> active maintenance someplace.  But it seems like there are two good
> arguments for having a copy in our tree:
>
> * easy accessibility for PG developers
>
> * at any given time we need to be using a specific "blessed" version,
> so that all developers can get equivalent results.  There's pretty much
> no chance of that happening if we depend on distro-provided packages,
> even if those share a common upstream.

Yeah, but those advantages could also be gained by putting the
pgindent tree on git.postgresql.org in a separate repository.  Having
it in the same repository as the actual PostgreSQL code is not
required nor, in my opinion, particularly desirable.

-- 
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company

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).