Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions

From: Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>
To: "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jonathan(dot)katz(at)excoventures(dot)com>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
Date: 2013-04-02 23:42:18
Message-ID: 20130402234218.GD4361@tamriel.snowman.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

* Jonathan S. Katz (jonathan(dot)katz(at)excoventures(dot)com) wrote:
> +1 - with a more outside perspective on the overall issue, I do have to say that I'm okay to any entity operating "critical infrastructure" or the like having access to a critical security patch before the source is made available. I think to reiterate what JD said, we should just communicate that better in the future.

Having some kind of documentation / policy regarding who can get access,
or what they have to do to get access, would certainly help address
these concerns.

For my 2c, I really don't feel this went very well and I absolutely
think that it's a black-eye that the common impression is that we gave
the fix to Heroku ahead of the public release.

Not sure what the best place to discuss this is, but, basically, I think
we can do better.

Thanks,

Stephen

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Selena Deckelmann 2013-04-03 00:03:08 Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
Previous Message Jonathan S. Katz 2013-04-02 23:23:53 Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions