Re: YAML

Andrew Dunstan <andrew@dunslane.net> writes:
> I was in fact prepared to commit this patch, despite some significant 
> misgivings about its wisdom, mainly because it does have such a low 
> impact. But then other people raised objections. I'm not sure how strong 
> those objections are, though.

The "lite" version posted by Itagaki-san on 11/30 seems short enough
that maybe we should just stop arguing and apply it.  There were some
other versions that fooled around with existing logic, which I was a lot
less happy about because of the difficulty of being sure that nothing
was broken.

I definitely don't think we should get involved with trying to create
support for plugin formatters or anything like that --- the amount of
effort required seems far out of proportion to the benefit.
        regards, tom lane