Jelte Fennema <postg...@jeltef.nl> writes:
> When reading the emails in this discussion from 2 years ago
> it seems like the respondents wouldn't mind updating the
> typedefs.list manually. And proposed approach number 3
> seemed to have support overall, i.e. fail a push to master
> when pgindent was not run on the new commit. Would
> it make sense to simply try that approach and see if
> there's any big issues with it?
I will absolutely not accept putting in something that fails pushes
on this basis. There are too many cases where pgindent purity is
not an overriding issue. I mentioned a counterexample just upthread:
even if you are as anal as you could be about indentation, you might
prefer to separate a logic-changing patch from the ensuing mechanical
reindentation.
regards, tom lane
