Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
От | Selena Deckelmann |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions |
Дата | |
Msg-id | CAN1EF+xGNPMVhavL3drNCmcK1nqEdfB+QbP5QH3cHWit4ow2QQ@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions (Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious
questions
Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 11:01 AM, Stephen Frost <sfrost@snowman.net> wrote:
-selena
* Selena Deckelmann (selena@chesnok.com) wrote:> Another important aspect of PostgreSQL is that we are a collective, ratherI wouldn't encourage this- but we do have a legal entity through SPI.
> than a company. We don't have, for example, a legal entity of record that
> could legitimately accept NDAs on behalf of our developers. (More than one
> vendor brought up "sign an NDA" as a way to get early access, and that's
> not a reasonable option for adding people to pgsql-security or
> pgsql-packagers.)
Were we, as a community, open to using 'signed an NDA' as sufficient
trust, using SPI as the entity could work. To be honest, I don't think
that we, collectively, feel that a signed NDA is sufficient.
As far as I know, our association with SPI hasn't been empowered to sign contracts on behalf of PGDG. They don't even hold any trademarks for us. PGDG's association with SPI is to receive donations and disperse grants. Happy to be corrected if I am mistaken on those points.
We also have several other non-profits whose missions are varied.
None are empowered to sign contracts or legally represent the developers who make up PGDG.
None are empowered to sign contracts or legally represent the developers who make up PGDG.
-selena
--
http://chesnok.com
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: