On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 07:47:01PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Jesse Zhang <sbje...@gmail.com> writes: > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 3:34 PM Andres Freund wrote: > >> Is there any reason we don't just automatically run pgindent regularly? > >> Like once a week? And also update typedefs.list automatically, while > >> we're at it? > > > You know what's better than weekly? Every check-in. > > I'm not in favor of unsupervised pgindent runs, really. It can do a lot > of damage to code that was written without thinking about it --- in > particular, it'll make a hash of comment blocks that were manually > formatted and not protected with dashes. > > If the workflow is commit first and re-indent later, then we can always > revert the pgindent commit and clean things up manually; but an auto > re-indent during commit wouldn't provide that history.
There are competing implementations of assuring pgindent-cleanliness at every check-in: 1. After each push, an automated followup commit appears, restoring pgindent-cleanliness. 2. "git push" results in a commit that melds pgindent changes into what the committer tried to push. 3. "git push" fails, for the master branch, if the pushed commit disrupts pgindent-cleanliness. Were you thinking of (2)? (1) doesn't have the lack-of-history problem, but it does have the unexpected-damage problem, and it makes gitweb noisier. (3) has neither problem, and I'd prefer it over (1), (2), or $SUBJECT. Regarding typedefs.list, I would use the in-tree one, like you discussed here: On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 07:57:29PM -0400, Tom Lane wrote: > Maybe the secret is to not allow automated adoption of new typedefs.list > entries, but to require somebody to add entries to that file by hand, > even if they're basing it on the buildfarm results. (This would > encourage the habit some people have adopted of updating typedefs.list > along with commits that add typedefs. I've never done that, but would > be willing to change if there's good motivation to.)
