Received: from malur.postgresql.org ([217.196.149.56]) by arkaria.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k6GQv-0002Wp-CV for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:50:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=malur.postgresql.org) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k6GQu-000631-AN for pgsql-hackers@arkaria.postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:50:28 +0000 Received: from makus.postgresql.org ([2001:4800:3e1:1::229]) by malur.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k6GQu-00062p-3I for pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:50:28 +0000 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us ([66.207.139.130]) by makus.postgresql.org with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k6GQn-0000CG-SJ for pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 16:50:27 +0000 Received: from sss1.sss.pgh.pa.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 07DGoGLC469404; Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:50:16 -0400 From: Tom Lane To: Stephen Frost cc: Magnus Hagander , Noah Misch , Jesse Zhang , Andres Freund , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner In-reply-to: <20200813163043.GZ29590@tamriel.snowman.net> References: <20200812223409.6di3y2qsnvynao7a@alap3.anarazel.de> <328084.1597276021@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20200813035308.GA1137170@rfd.leadboat.com> <397020.1597291716@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20200813163043.GZ29590@tamriel.snowman.net> Comments: In-reply-to Stephen Frost message dated "Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:30:44 -0400" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <469402.1597337415.1@sss.pgh.pa.us> Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2020 12:50:16 -0400 Message-ID: <469403.1597337416@sss.pgh.pa.us> List-Id: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Owner: List-Archive: Precedence: bulk Stephen Frost writes: > So, in our world, wouldn't this translate to 'make cfbot complain'? > I'm definitely a fan of the idea of having cfbot flag these and then we > maybe get to a point where it's not the committers dealing with fixing > patches that weren't pgindent'd properly, it's the actual patch > submitters being nagged about it... Meh. Asking all submitters to install pgindent is a bit of a burden. Moreover, sometimes it's better to provide a patch that deliberately hasn't reindented existing code, for ease of review (say, when you're adding if() { ... } around some big hunk of code). I think getting committers to do this as part of commit is a better workflow. (Admittedly, since I've been doing that for a long time, I don't find it to be a burden. I suppose some committers do.) regards, tom lane