Re: 8.4 release planning

From: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Stephen Frost <sfrost(at)snowman(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>, Gregory Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bernd Helmle <mailings(at)oopsware(dot)de>
Subject: Re: 8.4 release planning
Date: 2009-01-28 22:49:24
Message-ID: 200901282249.n0SMnOL04752@momjian.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On Tuesday 27 January 2009 16:36:50 Stephen Frost wrote:
> > * Peter Eisentraut (peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net) wrote:
> > > As one of the earlier reviewers, I think the design is OK, but the way
> > > the implementation is presented was not acceptable, and very little has
> > > been accomplished in terms of reacting to our comments. For example,
> > > where is the SQL row security feature, which should have been designed,
> > > implemented, and committed separately, in the opinion of most
> > > commentaries.
> >
> > Eh? Are you thinking of column-level privileges, which was committed
> > last week?
>
> No.

The point is we would have preferred to see SQL-level row permissions as
a separate patch first; that just didn't happen in this case, and it
makes the discussion a little more complex.

--
Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> http://momjian.us
EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com

+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2009-01-28 22:59:35 Re: 8.4 release planning
Previous Message Joshua Brindle 2009-01-28 22:47:00 Re: How to get SE-PostgreSQL acceptable