Postgres Pro
Downloads
Home   >   mailing lists

Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Jonathan S. Katz
Subject Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
Date
Msg-id 5055A5F3-8C6B-4569-862D-3A0E1F3E963F@excoventures.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions  ("Jonathan S. Katz" <jonathan.katz@excoventures.com>)
Responses Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
List pgsql-advocacy
Tree view
On Apr 2, 2013, at 8:14 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:

On Apr 2, 2013, at 8:03 PM, Selena Deckelmann wrote:

I agree that we should have a well-documented security release process. There are existing processes documented that we might use as a starting point, and I personally think largely match what we currently do, like: https://docs.djangoproject.com/en/1.5/internals/security/

The Django security release guide is good - I think we could almost copy & paste it.  I could throw something up on our wiki where we can fill in the blanks on what we want the actually policy to be and allow people to comment + add modifications.

Here is a wiki I through together combining elements of both our current security page and thoughts from the Django one:


I separated between our current policy and the draft.  The draft really needs some blanks to be filled in.

One suggestion (not in the draft) is that when we do make release announcements containing security fixes, we do include the URL to our security policy to make it clear what it is.

pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: "Jonathan S. Katz"
Date:
Subject: Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions
Next
From: Shane Ambler
Date:
Subject: Re: Heroku early upgrade is raising serious questions