From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
cc: Robert Haas <rhaas@postgresql.org>, pgsql-committers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: pgsql: Wait for WAL summarization to catch up before creating
 .partial
In-reply-to: 
 <CAPpHfdsZN0X52_HxHsLRD2Kp8=xkz28Nr-cSgxosaaXKORD3oA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <E1sXQCH-001Lc6-Hd@gemulon.postgresql.org>
 <CAPpHfdsZN0X52_HxHsLRD2Kp8=xkz28Nr-cSgxosaaXKORD3oA@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com>
	message dated "Sun, 28 Jul 2024 06:40:32 +0300"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2167360.1722139959.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2024 00:12:39 -0400
Message-ID: <2167361.1722139959@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2167361.1722139959%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Alexander Korotkov <aekorotkov@gmail.com> writes:
> It appears that I was late with my review [1].  But the new tap test
> could still use pgperltidy.

I believe our current policy is that we're asking committers to
maintain pgindent cleanliness, but not pgperltidy (which is why
BF member koel isn't checking pgperltidy).  We might get to that
eventually, but we're not there yet.

			regards, tom lane