NikhilS wrote:
> Hi,
>
> > The idea that we "fix" stylistic issues on the fly is not
> > sustainable.
> > > We should offer help and mentorship to new patch submitters in
> > > all areas (including stylistic) but they should do the work. It
> > > is the only way we will mold them to submit patches in the proper
> > > way.
> > >
> >
> > I agree. As a submitter I would much rather get an email saying
> > e.g. "Hey, your patch is nice but the code style sticks out like a
> > sore thumb. Please adopt surrounding naming convention and fix your
> > indentation per the rules at [link]." than have it fixed silently on
> > its way to being committed.
> >
> > With the former I learn something and get to improve my own work.
> > With the latter, my next patch is probably going to have the exact
> > same problem, which is in the long term just making extra work for
> > the reviewers.
> >
>
> I think, us patch-submitters should be asked to do a run of pg_indent
> on the files that we have modified. That should take care of atleast
> the indentation related issues. I looked at the README of
> src/tools/pgindent, and it should be easy to run enough (or is it
> not?). Only one thing that caught my eye was:
>
> 1) Build the source tree with _debug_ symbols and all possible
> configure options
>
> Can the above point be elaborated further? What all typical and
> possible configure options should be used to get a clean and complete
> pg_indent run?
>
> And I think adopting surrounding naming, commeting, coding conventions
> should come naturally as it can aide in copy-pasting too :)
I think pg_indent has to be made a lot more portable and easy to use
before that can happen :-) I've run it once or twice on linux machines,
and it comes out with huge changes compared to what Bruce gets on his
machine. Other times, it doesn't :-) So yeah, it could be that it just
needs to be made easier to use, because I may certainly have done
something wrong.
//Magnus
