| From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Michael Paquier <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Christoph Berg <myon(at)debian(dot)org>, Nicolas Guini <nicolasguini(at)gmail(dot)com>, PostgreSQL mailing lists <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Damian Quiroga <qdamian(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL - Weak DH group |
| Date: | 2017-07-13 17:04:02 |
| Message-ID: | 20170713170402.74uuoivrgd3c6tnw@alvherre.pgsql |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> wrote:
> > Objections to committing this now, instead of waiting for v11?
>
> But I am -1 for the sneak part. It is not the time to have a new
> feature in 10, the focus is to stabilize.
But if we were treating it as a security issue, would we backpatch it?
If we do, then it definitely makes sense to put something in pg10. I'm
not sure that this patch is it, though -- perhaps it makes sense to put
a minimal fix in older branches, and let the new feature wait for pg11?
--
Álvaro Herrera https://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Remote DBA, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christoph Berg | 2017-07-13 17:05:50 | Re: 10beta1 sequence regression failure on sparc64 |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-07-13 17:02:09 | Re: [WIP] Zipfian distribution in pgbench |