Re: First draft of the PG 15 release notes - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

On Tue, Jul  5, 2022 at 12:53:49PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 05, 2022 at 02:35:39PM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul  1, 2022 at 06:21:28PM -0700, Noah Misch wrote:
> > > Here's what I've been trying to ask: what do you think of linking to
> > > https://www.postgresql.org/docs/devel/ddl-schemas.html#DDL-SCHEMAS-PATTERNS
> > > here?  The release note text is still vague, and the docs have extensive
> > > coverage of the topic.  The notes can just link to that extensive coverage.
> > 
> > Sure. how is this patch?
> 
> > --- a/doc/src/sgml/release-15.sgml
> > +++ b/doc/src/sgml/release-15.sgml
> > @@ -63,11 +63,12 @@ Author: Noah Misch <noah@leadboat.com>
> >        permissions on the <literal>public</literal> schema has not
> >        been changed.  Databases restored from previous Postgres releases
> >        will be restored with their current permissions.  Users wishing
> > -      to have the former permissions will need to grant
> > +      to have the former more-open permissions will need to grant
> >        <literal>CREATE</literal> permission for <literal>PUBLIC</literal>
> >        on the <literal>public</literal> schema; this change can be made
> >        on <literal>template1</literal> to cause all new databases
> > -      to have these permissions.
> > +      to have these permissions.  This change was made to increase
> > +      security;  see <xref linkend="ddl-schemas-patterns"/>.
> >       </para>
> >      </listitem>
> 
> I think this still puts undue weight on single-user systems moving back to the
> old default.  The linked documentation does say how to get back to v14
> permissions (and disclaims security if you do so), so let's not mention it
> here.  The attached is how I would write it.  I also reworked the "Databases
> restored from previous ..." sentence, since its statement is also true of
> databases restored v15-to-v15 (no "previous" release involved).  I also moved
> the bit about USAGE to end, since it's just emphasizing what the reader should
> already assume.  Any concerns?

I see where you are going --- to talk about how to convert upgraded
clusters to secure clusters, rather than how to revert to the previous
behavior.  I assumed that the most common question would be how to get
the previous behavior, rather than how to get the new behavior in
upgraded clusters.  However, I am fine with what you think is best.

My only stylistic suggestion would be to remove "a" from "a
<literal>REVOKE</literal>".

-- 
  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        https://momjian.us
  EDB                                      https://enterprisedb.com

  Indecision is a decision.  Inaction is an action.  Mark Batterson