On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:10 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: >> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> Um, we normally take the buildfarm's list of typedefs, not anything >>> manually created. > >> Well, we can still do that, but I don't see much advantage in it. It >> just churns the file to the extent that manual review of the changes >> is impossible, and then when pgindent does the wrong thing it only >> gets reported after the fact. How is that better than making sure >> that the contents of the file are such as to actually produce good >> output from pgindent? > > On what grounds do you claim the buildfarm result is unstable? > I've been using that for a long time and it works fine. Moreover, > ignoring that data is a bad idea because it reflects platform-specific > variations in the set of typedefs that are known. If you build a > typedefs list based only on what works on your machine, it likely > won't work for other people.
/me shrugs Well, let's get the list, then, and compare it to what's in the file now. How do we do that exactly? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
