On Wed, Nov 12, 2025 at 3:36 AM Álvaro Herrera wrote:
> Thanks all for looking -- pushed.
Slightly late to the party, but thanks! This is much nicer.
--Jacob
On 2025-Nov-11, Tom Lane wrote:
> Daniel Gustafsson writes:
> > This proposal is a better solution than what was committed, +1.
>
> +1
Thanks all for looking -- pushed.
--
Álvaro Herrera PostgreSQL Developer — https://www.EnterpriseDB.com/
Daniel Gustafsson writes:
>> On 11 Nov 2025, at 12:41, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
>> Given that we use that macro in a single place,
>> what do you think about removing that and making a more surgical
>> intervention to fix pgindent problem with it? I propose the attached.
> This proposal is a bette
han what was committed, +1.
> Of course, there's nothing we can do with
> CURL_IGNORE_DEPRECATION() itself, given that it's upstream from us.
Yup, sorry about that.
--
Daniel Gustafsson
On 2025-11-11 Tu 6:41 AM, Álvaro Herrera wrote:
Hackers,
I just noticed that we have some ad-hoc hacks for the
CURL_IGNORE_DEPRECATION macro in the pgindent Perl script, which I find
a bit uncomfortable. Given that we use that macro in a single place,
what do you think about removing that
Hackers,
I just noticed that we have some ad-hoc hacks for the
CURL_IGNORE_DEPRECATION macro in the pgindent Perl script, which I find
a bit uncomfortable. Given that we use that macro in a single place,
what do you think about removing that and making a more surgical
intervention to fix
