Message-ID: <1362197787.11571.2.camel@vanquo.pezone.net>
Subject: Re: Proposed changes to security.html
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net>
To: Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Cc: PostgreSQL WWW <pgsql-www@postgresql.org>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2013 23:16:27 -0500
In-Reply-To: <51314656.1040106@agliodbs.com>
References: <5112B6A6.3080500@agliodbs.com> <51312CC2.70005@gmx.net>
	<51314656.1040106@agliodbs.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk
Sender: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org

On Fri, 2013-03-01 at 16:22 -0800, Josh Berkus wrote:
> > What would be the point of that, other than introducing the use of less
> > accurate language?
> 
> Oh, right, we have some contrib modules which are not extensions.
> However, the term "contrib" is confusing and not very helpful.  Maybe I
> should use the term "Additional Supplied Modules" (shorthand "modules"),
> which is what we use in the docs?

That might be worthwhile consideration for introductory or marketing
material, say, but for the purpose of tracking security issues,
"contrib" is perfectly clear: If you are installing from source, it is
code that lives under contrib/.  If you are installing from binary, it
is code that is in the postgresql-contrib package (usually).  Calling it
anything other than "contrib" cannot possibly make that more clear.


-- 
Sent via pgsql-www mailing list (pgsql-www@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-www