On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 19:21, Josh Berkus <j...@agliodbs.com> wrote: > >>> You can't indent patches, only patched files. And that's the problem >>> with this happy scheme. For it to work at all sanely we'd need to keep >>> the committed code that the patch is to be applied against strictly >>> pgindent clean, presumably via some automated process such as a commit >>> hook. That's been suggested in the past, but hasn't met with universal >>> approval, IIRC. > > Well, there is another solution to this, which is to use Git branches > and forks instead of mailing around patches.
That makes no difference to this problem, really. If the committer (or reviewer) has to reindent it anyway, you can just as well do a "git checkout work && patch -p1 < /where/ever && pgindent && git diff" as "git remote add somewhere && git fetch somewhere && git checkout work --track somewhere/something && pgindent && git diff". There are some reasons why using git branches and forks are nice to work with, but they don't solve tihs problem. Or are you saying there should be an automated service where you registered your git url + branch and then it would pull that branch, run pgindent for you, and then republish it somewhere? Not sure how big a win that is in the end, plus it's going to fail as soon as you get a confligt anywhere anyway... -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
