Andres Freund <and...@anarazel.de> writes:
> I think I've proposed this before, but I still think that as long as we rely
> on pg_bsd_indent, we should have it be part of our source tree and
> automatically built. It's no wonder that barely anybody indents their
> patches, given that it requires building pg_bsd_ident in a separate repo (but
> referencing our sourc etree), putting the binary in path, etc.
Hmm ... right offhand, the only objection I can see is that the
pg_bsd_indent files use the BSD 4-clause license, which is not ours.
However, didn't UCB grant a blanket exception years ago that said
that people could treat that as the 3-clause license? If we could
get past the license question, I agree that doing what you suggest
would be superior to the current situation.
regards, tom lane
