| From: | Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | Selena Deckelmann <selena(at)chesnok(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andres Freund <andres(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Michael Meskes <meskes(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Dave Page <dpage(at)pgadmin(dot)org>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Adrian Klaver <adrian(dot)klaver(at)gmail(dot)com>, damien clochard <damien(at)dalibo(dot)info>, "Jonathan S(dot) Katz" <jonathan(dot)katz(at)excoventures(dot)com>, PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions |
| Date: | 2013-04-09 18:13:58 |
| Message-ID: | 20130409181357.GW4361@tamriel.snowman.net |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
* Selena Deckelmann (selena(at)chesnok(dot)com) wrote:
> None are empowered to sign contracts or legally represent the developers
> who make up PGDG.
It is not the developers comprised of PGDG who are required to sign into
an NDA. It is company A, B, or C who would need to sign an NDA with "some
legal entity", giving that legal entity the power/right to sue company A,
B, or C, were they to release the information provided to them
inappropriately under a breach of contract.
Notionally, perhaps a PGDG developer would provide the data to the
'legal entity' who would then provide the information to the company, to
legitimatize the contract, but that would not require any NDA or
contract to be signed by the PGDG developer.
Thanks,
Stephen
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Stephen Frost | 2013-04-09 18:17:56 | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions |
| Previous Message | Andres Freund | 2013-04-09 18:09:15 | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions |