Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.204.183]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 338B764FC52 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:31 -0400 (AST) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 41987-01 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:28 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.169]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C50264FC40 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 11:29:27 -0400 (AST) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id k40so763029ugc.7 for ; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:29:25 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.67.115.5 with SMTP id s5mr1890916ugm.54.1227540564683; Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:29:24 -0800 (PST) Received: from oxford.xeocode.com.enterprisedb.com ([87.127.95.198]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u1sm4588186uge.8.2008.11.24.07.29.23 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 24 Nov 2008 07:29:23 -0800 (PST) To: Tom Lane Cc: Magnus Hagander , Hiroshi Saito , ITAGAKI Takahiro , Jaime Casanova , Alvaro Herrera , pgsql-hackers Subject: Re: [PATCHES] Solve a problem of LC_TIME of windows. In-Reply-To: <18269.1227538234@sss.pgh.pa.us> (Tom Lane's message of "Mon\, 24 Nov 2008 09\:50\:34 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.1 (gnu/linux) X-Draft-From: ("nnimap+imap.gmail.com:HACKERS" 49424) References: <20081104094301.7EE8.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp> <3073cc9b0811102212n278644a8o7169f7c5ea562081@mail.gmail.com> <20081111152112.B605.52131E4D@oss.ntt.co.jp> <446F4763B989489C9B626D21AB9F6C7F@HIRO57887DE653> <492AA5CD.8050001@hagander.net> <18269.1227538234@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Gregory Stark Organization: EnterpriseDB Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:29:22 +0000 Message-ID: <87hc5xrvl9.fsf@oxford.xeocode.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=none X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200811/1581 X-Sequence-Number: 128293 Tom Lane writes: > Please stick to the convention of including include files in > alphabetical order. I didn't realize we had such a convention. Is this for all include files or only within a directory? Are there exceptions where the order matters or have we managed to make sure it doesn't everywhere? -- Gregory Stark EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com Get trained by Bruce Momjian - ask me about EnterpriseDB's PostgreSQL training!