| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> |
| Cc: | gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] [PATCHES] Removing Kerberos 4 |
| Date: | 2005-06-22 20:39:15 |
| Message-ID: | 21285.1119472755@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general pgsql-hackers |
"Magnus Hagander" <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net> writes:
> Yeah. But it has been declared dead by the Kerberos folks
> (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/kerberos-faq/general/section-7.html. And this
> document is from 2000, an dit was declared already then)...
Right. The real question here is who's going to be using a 2005
database release with a pre-2000 security system? There's a fair
amount of code there and no evidence that time spent on testing
and maintaining it is going to benefit anyone anymore.
If someone wakes up and says "hey, I'm still ACTUALLY using that code",
I'm willing to forbear ... but otherwise I think its time is long gone.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David Parker | 2005-06-22 21:06:02 | Re: dump/restore bytea fields |
| Previous Message | CSN | 2005-06-22 20:36:20 | Setting global vars for use with triggers |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Magnus Hagander | 2005-06-22 21:03:21 | Re: pg_terminate_backend idea |
| Previous Message | Merlin Moncure | 2005-06-22 20:34:19 | Re: pl/pgsql: END verbosity |