Subject: Re: run pgindent on a regular basis / scripted manner

From: Andrew Dunstan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 11:46:24 -0500

On 2023-02-13 Mo 13:29, Jelte Fennema wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2023 at 17:47, Andrew Dunstan<[email-masked]>  wrote:
>> OK, but I'd like to hear from more people about what they want. Experience tells me that making assumptions about how people work is not a good idea. I doubt anyone's work pattern is like mine. I don't want to implement an option that three people are going to use.
>
> In the general case I agree with you. But in this specific case I
> don't. To me the whole point of this email thread is to nudge people
> towards indenting the changes that they are committing. Thus indenting
> those changes (either before or after adding) is the workflow that we
> want to make as easy as possible. Because even if it's not people
> their current workflow, by adding the flag it hopefully becomes their
> workflow, because it's so easy to use. So my point is we want to
> remove as few hurdles as possible for people to indent their changes
> (and setting up git aliases or pre-commit hooks are all hurdles).

(ITYM "remove as many hurdles as possible"). It remains to be seen how 
much easier any of this will make life for committers, at least. But I 
concede this might make life a bit simpler for developers generally.

Anyway, let's talk about the details of what is proposed.

So far, we have had the following categories suggested: dirty, staged, 
dirty+staged, untracked. Are there any others?

Another issue is whether or not to restrict these to files under the 
current directory. I think we probably should, or at least provide a 
--relative option.

cheers

andrew

--
Andrew Dunstan
EDB:https://www.enterprisedb.com