From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
cc: Jelte Fennema <postgres@jeltef.nl>, Peter Geoghegan <pg@bowt.ie>,
        Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>,
        Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net>,
        Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>,
        "shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com" <shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com>,
        Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>, Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>,
        Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>,
        Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>,
        Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@2ndquadrant.com>,
        Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>, Jesse Zhang <sbjesse@gmail.com>,
        "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>,
        Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@enterprisedb.com>
Subject: Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner
In-reply-to: 
 <CA+TgmoYxG2Y56Wzg36otfK-FDEGeNkSwtLQU6pbP3-ix6FcZJQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAGECzQTvfpkyyRoGscSuS7ySCEXOO1DCi3eztHQbGEDrj_nt4g@mail.gmail.com>
 <30a72ba4-9ca4-15b5-db0f-0e68cba7ab26@dunslane.net>
 <1f594a4b-14c8-e159-b250-edf8a091320d@dunslane.net>
 <CAH2-WznOKBQ3HvdwvyXHz18T2u-brkE5umDUic4B-2vtavJKqA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20230811212511.aih23qfthi24zhq4@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <CAH2-Wz=+23=O6iioUR_k9-mgUoX2kJPOWW5JdOXmd5dCtvinVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <338202.1691793002@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAH2-Wz=TNXWQWFgZPehFyPo+9HxxwuHHHYA-ymR+W+kMChM+9Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <342032.1691794926@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <8c4d8afb-cda1-299c-8011-f60cdaff3999@dunslane.net>
 <20230812211404.sydbwo2juu7vyhtg@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <530189.1691880417@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAH2-Wz=OXmLbQ9ykYYSTmadD=fHtn7-ctCqsco7rc2s3Fvx8QQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <544112.1691886017@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <CAH2-WzmueQvoZVScpUcAes3Gq_OGCnOH1RXyMicrMdyaAg6OLA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAH2-WznZ4g8mrHCPVr5MBcSFenFnaKPp2K52JvqLt2fjdcR-bg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoYPycBvESpVkTsEEDrt8PbUnLR1SHSYOKzM_bnkd-UkfQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoYdrQkr6BBekHJq-1Dga!
 n=Vuz0kGsfZdJ5_0jx9s+zzqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAGECzQR4Dqb4Rpm4N9LbdMKB91hHLVSEvHo5kcWSjLA5yy5LuA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+TgmoYxG2Y56Wzg36otfK-FDEGeNkSwtLQU6pbP3-ix6FcZJQ@mail.gmail.com>
Comments: In-reply-to Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
	message dated "Tue, 17 Oct 2023 11:42:27 -0400"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <2817271.1697559531.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 12:18:51 -0400
Message-ID: <2817272.1697559531@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/2817272.1697559531%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
> One potential problem with a server-side hook is that if you back-port
> a commit to older branches and then push the commits all together
> (which is my workflow) then you might get failure to push on some
> branches but not others. I don't know if there's any way to avoid
> that, but it seems not great. You could think of enforcing the policy
> only on master to try to avoid this, but that still leaves a risk that
> you manage to push to all the back-branches and not to master.

Is that actually possible?  I had the idea that "git push" is an
atomic operation, ie 100% or nothing.  Is it only atomic per-branch?

			regards, tom lane