From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
cc: Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentraut@2ndquadrant.com>,
        pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner
In-reply-to: <20200815165913.edntewip5nuot35l@alap3.anarazel.de>
References: <20200812223409.6di3y2qsnvynao7a@alap3.anarazel.de>
 <34b759cf-e2eb-2244-0d3b-9538b387b249@2ndquadrant.com>
 <20200815165913.edntewip5nuot35l@alap3.anarazel.de>
Comments: In-reply-to Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>
	message dated "Sat, 15 Aug 2020 09:59:13 -0700"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <907238.1597513474.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 13:44:34 -0400
Message-ID: <907239.1597513474@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> One thing is that some here are actively against manually adding entries
> to typedefs.list.

I've been of the opinion that it's pointless to do so under the current
regime where (a) only a few people do that and (b) we only officially
re-indent once a year anyway.  When I want to manually run pgindent,
I always pull down a fresh typedefs.list from the buildfarm, which is
reasonably up-to-date regardless of what people added or didn't add,
and then add any new typedefs from my current patch to that out-of-tree
copy.

Now, if we switch to a regime where we're trying to keep the tree in
more nearly correctly-indented shape all the time, it would make sense
to revisit that.  I'm not saying that it's unreasonable to want to have
the in-tree typedefs.list track reality more closely --- only that doing
so in a half-baked way won't be very helpful.

>> I think as a start, we could just issue a guidelines that all committed=
 code
>> should follow pgindent.  That has never really been a guideline, so it'=
s not
>> surprising that it's not followed.

> Without a properly indented baseline that's hard to do, because it'll
> cause damage all over. So I don't think we easily can start just there -
> we'd first need to re-indent everything.

Well, we can certainly do a tree-wide re-indent anytime we're ready.
I doubt it would be very painful right now, with so little new work
since the last run.

			regards, tom lane