Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
От | damien clochard |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 5163D399.10300@dalibo.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions (Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org>) |
Ответы |
Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Le 09/04/2013 10:21, Dave Page a écrit : > On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 2:20 AM, Joshua D. Drake <jd@commandprompt.com> wrote: >> >> On 04/08/2013 05:50 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>> Agreed. As far as I can see things where handled in the Postgres way, >>>> when in doubt err on the side of caution. I applaud the efforts of those >>>> concerned and trust in their ability to build on the experience. >>> >>> >>> Mostly I'd rather be arguing as to whether or not we should have given >>> Heroku early deployment >> >> >> No. >> >> That isn't to say I didn't understand that theory of doing so. I do. >> However, you essentially created a class of user that is above other users >> and that is explicitly not Open Source. > > I'm not arguing either way here... but if you think of DBaaS as "the > new packaging", it starts to seem more reasonable to give folks like > Heroku access at the same time as the traditional packagers. > Just to make things clear : my previous message is not about wether or nor a DBaaS provider should have early access to security releases (even if that's a good question). My message is about wether or not a DBaaS provider should be allowed to deploy the security release days before the official release date.
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: