Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation
Date
Msg-id 1755.1495211474@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation  (Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>)
Responses Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindentimplementation  (Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> 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.

It adds an extra step to what a developer has to do to get pgindent
up and running, so it doesn't seem to me like it's helping the goal
of reducing the setup overhead.
        regards, tom lane



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Andres Freund
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindentimplementation
Next
From: Tom Lane
Date:
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Preliminary results for proposed new pgindent implementation