On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 10:38:41AM -0400, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 5:28 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: > > Right now we're really just speculating about how much pain there will > > be, on either end of this. So it'd be interesting for somebody who's > > carrying large out-of-tree patches (EDB? Citus?) to try the new > > pgindent version on a back branch and see how much of their patches no > > longer apply afterwards. > > EDB is not continuously reapplying patches; we have branches into > which the upstream reindents would have to be merged. As a broad > statement, reindenting all of the back branches is surely going to > create some extra work for whoever has to do those merges, but if > that's what the community thinks is best, we will of course manage. > It's not *that* bad. > > It would be slightly less annoying for us, I think, if the reindent > were done immediately after a minor-release rather than at some other > random point in time.
Also keep in mind that if we don't reindent all active branches then even forks of Postgres will have merge conflicts in backporting of their own patches, meaning the community and forks will have backbranch patch difficulties. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription + -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (email@example.com) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers