Re: [HACKERS] What goes into the security doc?
От | Dan Langille |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] What goes into the security doc? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3F507B21.17705.2E948175@localhost обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] What goes into the security doc? (Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] What goes into the security doc?
|
Список | pgsql-docs |
On 30 Aug 2003 at 16:15, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Dan Langille writes: > > > I've started. I'm wondering how much we need to cover here and how > > much can be delegated to other sections of the documentation. Before > > I get very far into this, I want to get some ideas as to what we > > need. > > If you intend this to go into the main documentation, then I think we > don't need anything, because everything is already documented in its > proper place. It has already been decided that we need something. Hence the request for someone to write it and my start on the task. > What you wrote is basically just a summary of various > system aspects that might have to do with that vague word "security", > together with pointers to the places where they are documented (which > reinforces my point). Your point being that we don't need anything more than we already have? That conflicts with what has already been decided. > Perhaps a "howto" format that you can post on > techdocs might be more appropriate for you. I'm not sure what you mean by "for you". -- Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
В списке pgsql-docs по дате отправления: