* Peter Eisentraut (pete...@gmx.net) wrote: > On 3/3/15 5:29 PM, Stephen Frost wrote: > > For my part, I understood that we specifically didn't want to allow that > > for the same reason that we didn't want to simply depend on the GRANT > > system for the above functions, but everyone else on these discussions > > so far is advocating for using the GRANT system. My memory might be > > wrong, but I could have sworn that I had brought up exactly that > > suggestion in years past only to have it shot down. > > I think a lot of this access control work is done based on some > undocumented understandings, when in fact there is no consensus on > anything. I think we need more clarity.
When there hasn't been discussion on a particular topic and years of
ongoing development, all of which uses one approach, I tend to figure
that makes it an unspoking consensus. I'm not saying we shouldn't
question that when it makes sense to, we certainly should, but I'm not
sure it makes sense to ask "why didn't you attempt to get consensus on
this thing we've all been doing for years?"
Thanks,
Stephen
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
