Re: @(#)Mordred Labs advisory 0x0007: Remove DoS in PostgreSQL

From: Lamar Owen <lamar(dot)owen(at)wgcr(dot)org>
To: "Dann Corbit" <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>, "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, "Tom Lane" <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Sir Mordred The Traitor" <mordred(at)s-mail(dot)com>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: @(#)Mordred Labs advisory 0x0007: Remove DoS in PostgreSQL
Date: 2002-08-26 19:01:23
Message-ID: 200208261501.23009.lamar.owen@wgcr.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Monday 26 August 2002 02:51 pm, Dann Corbit wrote:
> I want to make it clear that I think the best way to report a problem is
> with formal, rigorous, complete structure. That structure should be
> known to the receiving body. If there is a procedure or standard form
> for producing the needed information, it is better to follow the
> standard procedure.

Ok, let's do that then. SOP is to use the bug reporting form contained on the
website, which posts a bug report to pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org, which is the
canonical bugreport list. That is if we want to get that formal.

> But standardized or not,
> it can still contain information of great value.

Yes, it can. I can use steganography to issue an RPM release announcement,
too. But will it be effective? :-)

If it isn't read, it won't be acted upon. His announcements have been a
difficult read, that's all. The substance is OK; the presentation is lacking,
IMHO.
--
Lamar Owen
WGCR Internet Radio
1 Peter 4:11

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-08-26 19:01:37 Re: LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2002-08-26 18:53:45 Re: LIMIT 1 FOR UPDATE or FOR UPDATE LIMIT 1?