Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes:
>> I know we are a little uncomfortable here but KaiGai-San (forgive me if
>> I type that wrong) has proven to be a contributor in his own right,
>
> Not to put too fine a point on it, but: no, he hasn't. Show me one
> significant patch he's contributed before/beside this one. The only
I thought Joshua was talking about his contribtions to F/OSS in general.
He's credited on the NSA site for SELinux kernel scalability and
locking issues:
http://www.nsa.gov/research/selinux/contrib.shtml "Kaigai Kohei of NEC replaced the original Access Vector Cache
(AVC)locking scheme with a RCU-based approach, which solved the major SELinux kernel scalability problem, and fixed
other locking issues in the SELinux kernel code. He later optimized the SELinux ebitmap implementation to improve
performanceon AVC misses. He also developed SE PostgreSQL, and is one of the developers for the SE busybox
project."
At first glance it seems it'd be valuable to have him as an
active member of this community.
> Frankly, what we have here is a large patch, with insanely difficult
> correctness requirements, written by a Postgres newbie.
I'm kinda hoping the discussion could turn to "what parts (no
matter how small) seem both useful safe enough for 8.4" - even
if the main use of the small parts ar just as hooks to make it
easier for SEPostgres to live as a parallel side project.
As far as I can tell, the community feels interested in the
feature set; but relatively unable to contribute since none
of the people have that much of a security background. It
seems the best way to fix that would be to get more people
with a security background more involved.
Not push them away.