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 (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
