Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 11:22 AM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I certainly would rather that our version matched something that's under >> active maintenance someplace. But it seems like there are two good >> arguments for having a copy in our tree: >> >> * easy accessibility for PG developers >> >> * at any given time we need to be using a specific "blessed" version, >> so that all developers can get equivalent results. There's pretty much >> no chance of that happening if we depend on distro-provided packages, >> even if those share a common upstream.
> Yeah, but those advantages could also be gained by putting the > pgindent tree on git.postgresql.org in a separate repository. Having > it in the same repository as the actual PostgreSQL code is not > required nor, in my opinion, particularly desirable. It adds an extra step to what a developer has to do to get pgindent up and running, so it doesn't seem to me like it's helping the goal of reducing the setup overhead. regards, tom lane -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (firstname.lastname@example.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers