Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Looking at this further, I am wondering if it would not be better to put
> > sample .emacs and .vimrc files in the source (in, say, src.tools).
> >
> > The docs/FAQ would just say that we use BSD style with tab space 4 and
> > refer to the sample files.
>
> Andrew, I am
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >> I will try to draw all this together today or tomorrow. It's not only
> >> the FAQ that should be patched - the docs and the FAQ should agree with
> >> each other.
> >>
> >
> > Right.
> >
> >
> >> In fact,
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jim C. Nasby wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 07:22:45PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
>>> Has anyone considered adding vi/vim options to the files themselves?
>>
>> Yeah, which is the real question... do people think it's worth it enough
>> to move towar
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 07:22:45PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
"Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Has anyone considered adding vi/vim options to the files themselves?
Granted, not a trivial task, but it would ensure anyone using vim would
have the correct
Jim C. Nasby wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 07:22:45PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
> > "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > Has anyone considered adding vi/vim options to the files themselves?
> > > Granted, not a trivial task, but it would ensure anyone using vim would
> > > hav
On Sat, Sep 02, 2006 at 07:22:45PM +0100, Gregory Stark wrote:
> "Jim C. Nasby" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Has anyone considered adding vi/vim options to the files themselves?
> > Granted, not a trivial task, but it would ensure anyone using vim would
> > have the correct settings. I don't
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 09:48:01PM -0400, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> > Looking at this further, I am wondering if it would not be better to put
> > sample .emacs and .vimrc files in the source (in, say, src.tools).
>
> What does people use in .vimrc? Mine has simply this:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Looking at this further, I am wondering if it would not be better to put
> sample .emacs and .vimrc files in the source (in, say, src.tools).
What does people use in .vimrc? Mine has simply this:
: set cinoptions=(0
: set tabstop=4
: set shiftwidth=4
wrapped in a
David Fetter wrote:
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 06:28:06PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
David Fetter wrote:
thoughts?
If we put them in a place that's visible before you get the source,
we can help people use the settings globally :)
The likely level of our influence on someone who hasn't used th
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 06:28:06PM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> >>
> >>thoughts?
> >
> >If we put them in a place that's visible before you get the source,
> >we can help people use the settings globally :)
>
> The likely level of our influence on someone who hasn't used th
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> David Fetter wrote:
> >If we put them in a place that's visible before you get the source, we
> >can help people use the settings globally :)
>
> The likely level of our influence on someone who hasn't used the
> settings and isn't editing our source code is approximately
David Fetter wrote:
Looking at this further, I am wondering if it would not be better to
put sample .emacs and .vimrc files in the source (in, say,
src.tools).
The docs/FAQ would just say that we use BSD style with tab space 4
and refer to the sample files.
thoughts?
If we put them in a
On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 11:06:01AM -0400, Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >Andrew Dunstan wrote:
> >
> >>I will try to draw all this together today or tomorrow. It's not only
> >>the FAQ that should be patched - the docs and the FAQ should agree with
> >>each other.
> >
> >Right.
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Looking at this further, I am wondering if it would not be better to put
> sample .emacs and .vimrc files in the source (in, say, src.tools).
Seems reasonable. I was about to say "what if they're just looking at
the docs and don't have a source tree?"
Bruce Momjian wrote:
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
I will try to draw all this together today or tomorrow. It's not only
the FAQ that should be patched - the docs and the FAQ should agree with
each other.
Right.
In fact, this info arguably belongs in one place only. Which should it be?
Andrew Dunstan wrote:
>
> I will try to draw all this together today or tomorrow. It's not only
> the FAQ that should be patched - the docs and the FAQ should agree with
> each other.
Right.
> In fact, this info arguably belongs in one place only. Which should it be?
Uh, if you put it in the
I will try to draw all this together today or tomorrow. It's not only
the FAQ that should be patched - the docs and the FAQ should agree with
each other.
In fact, this info arguably belongs in one place only. Which should it be?
cheers
andrew
Bruce Momjian wrote:
I am still waiting for an
I am still waiting for an actual patch to the developer's FAQ for this.
---
Gregory Stark wrote:
>
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I use more or less what is in the developers' FAQ (not surprising, since
Gregory Stark wrote:
>
> Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I use more or less what is in the developers' FAQ (not surprising, since I
> > contributed it). It works just fine for me. See
> > http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html#item1.9
> >
> > We should probably bring t
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I use more or less what is in the developers' FAQ (not surprising, since I
> contributed it). It works just fine for me. See
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html#item1.9
>
> We should probably bring the docs in line with that, unless som
Andrew Dunstan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I use more or less what is in the developers' FAQ (not surprising, since
> I contributed it). It works just fine for me. See
> http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faqs.FAQ_DEV.html#item1.9
> We should probably bring the docs in line with that, unless someo
Jeff Davis wrote:
At the link:
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.1/static/source.html
It gives some style configuration code to put in the .emacs file.
However, when I do that, emacs doesn't appear to follow the style of the
postgresql source. For instance, inside a function definition emacs
alw
22 matches
Mail list logo
