Re: Safe security

From: "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Tim Bunce <Tim(dot)Bunce(at)pobox(dot)com>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Safe security
Date: 2010-03-08 16:55:29
Message-ID: 31080A4F-0EE0-40A3-86A3-94C7F0D3118C@kineticode.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mar 8, 2010, at 8:03 AM, Tom Lane wrote:

> #3 is still an absolute nonstarter, especially for a patch that we'd
> wish to backpatch.

You're at least going to want to exclude Safe 2.20 - 2.23, IIUC.

Best,

David

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jaime Casanova 2010-03-08 16:58:20 Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL
Previous Message Kevin Grittner 2010-03-08 16:25:41 Re: SQL compatibility reminder: MySQL vs PostgreSQL