Mark Dilger <hornschnor...@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Nov 28, 2017, at 12:47 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>> I think that'd be taking it too far, especially given that the dependency
>> on a typedefs list means that the git hook might have a different idea
>> of what's correctly indented than the committer does. It'd be very hard
>> to debug such discrepancies and figure out what would satisfy the hook.
> It sounds like it just requires that the committer also commit any changes
> to the typedefs list, such that the indenter run by the git hook can use the
> same list the committer is using. For many commits, the typedefs list won't
> change, and the hook would just use the most recent one from the repository.
> Barring any objections, I'll see if I can make that work on my local git repo
> and post a patch if so.
The other problem that would have to be considered is cross-branch
variation in the indent rules. We've generally been in the habit of
back-patching HEAD diffs without worrying about whether they meet
back-branch rules; certainly nobody maintains typedefs.list in the
back branches. Maybe the most expedient answer for that is to only
enforce indentation in HEAD.
I'm still not really on board with this though. I can definitely
see the day coming when it would block a security patch and somebody
would be scrambling desperately to fix their indentation under time
pressure, even though perhaps the patch had been fine when created.
regards, tom lane
