From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Importing pg_bsd_indent into our source tree
In-reply-to: <20230209215532.oomwhj5jyggmciq7@awork3.anarazel.de>
References: <3935719.1675967430@sss.pgh.pa.us>
 <20230209210202.t6n35jaiuw6nl4dk@awork3.anarazel.de>
 <20230209215532.oomwhj5jyggmciq7@awork3.anarazel.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Thu, 09 Feb 2023 13:55:32 -0800"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3965807.1675980772.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2023 17:12:52 -0500
Message-ID: <3965808.1675980772@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: 
 <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/3965808.1675980772%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

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. Pe=
rhaps
> we should just move it to a shell script? Or maybe it just doesn't matte=
r
> 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=3Dbuild#L1573

Thanks, I'll take a look at these things.

> To we really want to require users to install pg_bsd_indent into PATH? S=
eems
> 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