Peter Eisentraut <peter.eisentr...@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > In my experience, changes to function declarations in header files > happen a lot in forks. So applying the pgindent change to backbranches > would cause some trouble.
> On the other hand, it seems to me that patches that we backpatch between > PostgreSQL branches should normally not touch function declarations in > header files, since that would be an ABI break. So by not applying the > pgindent change in backbranches we don't lose anything. And so it would > be better to just leave things as they are. Maybe we could wait awhile and see how much pain we find in back-patching across this change. I have to admit that the v10 pgindent changes have not been as painful as I expected them to be, so maybe this round will also prove to be just an annoyance not a major PITA for that. Another thought is that, at least in principle, we could re-indent only .c files not .h files in the back branches. But I'm not sure I believe your argument that forks are more likely to touch exposed extern declarations than local static declarations. regards, tom lane