Re: Split security info into current/historic

From: Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-www <pgsql-www(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Split security info into current/historic
Date: 2015-02-02 14:37:44
Message-ID: CABUevEzrZZ4VUQYp0Et1HypMax=2bjLuBU+2hzi_ZGu2JO06cQ@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-www

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 8:39 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:

> On 01/28/2015 10:44 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 7:20 PM, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com
> > <mailto:josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>> wrote:
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > I tried to split support/security into current and historic pages
> (the
> > later covering expired versions of postgres) ages ago and my patch
> was
> > rejected. I can't find that now, and IIRC it was pre-Django anyway.
> > Can someone remind me of what the restrictions around this were, if
> any?
> >
> >
> > One of the things on the TODO list is to move that data into the db and
> > generate the page, to make it easier update and less error-prone. IIRC,
> > last time we talked about the split, we said we should do the db thing
> > first, and then it could easily auto-split on "affects supported
> version".
>
> Is the DB move really going to happen soon enough that it doesn't make
> sense to split the page now?
>
>
Well, splitting that page in any useful form source based is probably quite
a bit of work. If that work is spent on db'ifying it, I think it's almost
done already? :P

--
Magnus Hagander
Me: http://www.hagander.net/
Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-www by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2015-02-03 06:31:51 Re: Split security info into current/historic
Previous Message Magnus Hagander 2015-02-01 10:13:46 Re: patch extracting