On Fri, Mar 13, 2020 at 4:22 PM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>
> Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com> writes:
> > Also, I wonder if it would be better to modify our policies so that we
> > update typedefs.list more frequently. Some people include additions
> > with their commits, but it's far from SOP.
>
> Perhaps. My own workflow includes pulling down a fresh typedefs.list
> from the buildfarm (which is trivial to automate) and then adding any
> typedefs invented by the patch I'm working on. The latter part of it
> makes it hard to see how the in-tree list would be very helpful; and
> if we started expecting patches to include typedef updates, I'm afraid
> we'd get lots of patch collisions in that file.
>
> I don't have any big objection to updating the in-tree list more often,
> but personally I wouldn't use it, unless we can find a better workflow.
How does the buildfarm automate generating the typedefs list? Would it
be relatively easy to incorporate that into a tool that someone could
use locally with pgindent?
Thanks,
James
