On 16 August 2012 16:56, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > Good to know. We only use pgrminclude very five years or so, and Tom > isn't even keen on that.
Yeah. Even if this could be made to work well, we'd still have to do something like get an absolute consensus from all build farm animals, if we expected to have an absolutely trustworthy list. I don't think pgrminclude is a bad idea. I just think that it should only be used to guide the efforts of a human to remove superfluous #includes, which is how it is used anyway. -- Peter Geoghegan http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training and Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
