Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> Did that in the attached.
Thanks.
> I didn't convert the test though, due to the duplicating it'd create. Perhaps
> we should just move it to a shell script? Or maybe it just doesn't matter
> enough to bother with?
We could move it to a shell script perhaps, but that seems pretty
low-priority.
> It doesn't build as-is with msvc, but does build with mingw. Failure:
> https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6290206869946368?logs=build#L1573
Thanks, I'll take a look at these things.
> To we really want to require users to install pg_bsd_indent into PATH? Seems
> like we ought to have a build target to invoke pgindent with a path to
> pg_bsd_indent or such? But I guess we can address that later.
For the moment I was just interested in maintaining the current workflow.
I know people muttered about having some sort of build target that'd
indent the whole tree from scratch after building pg_bsd_indent, but it's
not very clear to me how that'd work with e.g. VPATH configurations.
(I think you can already tell pgindent to use a specific pg_bsd_indent,
if your gripe is just about wanting to use a prebuilt copy that you
don't want to keep in PATH for some reason.)
> Independent of this specific patch: You seem to be generating your patch
> series by invoking git show and redirecting that to a file?
Yeah, it's pretty low-tech. I'm not in the habit of posting multi-patch
series very often, so I haven't really bothered to use format-patch.
(I gave up on "git am" long ago as being too fragile, and always
use good ol' "patch" to apply patches, so I don't think about things
like whether it'd automatically absorb commit messages. I pretty much
never use anyone else's commit message verbatim anyway ...)
regards, tom lane
