Re: Proposed enhancement to scp

From: Darren Tucker (dtucker_at_dodgy.net.au)
Date: 02/27/04 

Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 06:48:43 +0000 (UTC)

In article <FKOdnb2M0PGpdaDdRVn-tA@comcast.com>,
Nico Kadel-Garcia <nkadel@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>"Darren Tucker" <dtucker@dodgy.net.au> wrote in message
>news:c1jc0a$t7n$1@gate.dodgy.net.au...
>
>> Go to http://bugzilla.mindrot.org, open a bug against OpenSSH with the
>> severity set to "enhancement".
>
>Good flipping luck. I have an old one suggesting integrating chroot behavior
>into the main codeline, http://bugzilla.mindrot.org/show_bug.cgi?id=177, and
>haven't seen a yay or nay in 2 years.

That's a fair point.

The thing is: the OpenSSH developers (and in the interests of disclosure,
I should mention that I'm one of them) are all volunteers, and it can be
hard to get around to things that are low priority or about which there
are mixed opinions on what the Right Thing is.

On the other hand, there have been around 600 other bug reports/feature
requests that *have* been dealt with in that time, just counting the ones
in bugzilla. A quick grep shows that between 3.7.1 and 3.8 there were
about 100 individual changes in OpenBSD's OpenSSH and an additional 180
or so in -Portable.

>Instead, people are grabbing the patch
>from chrootssh.sourceforge.net and stapling it in by hand, which is just
>asking for grief.

I think the existence of third-party patches is healthy thing.

They provide functionality that some people need or want, and many of the
current features started life as third-party patches (GSSAPI support and
the current PAM code are two that come to mind). 

-- 
Darren Tucker (dtucker at zip.com.au)
GPG key 8FF4FA69 / D9A3 86E9 7EEE AF4B B2D4  37C9 C982 80C7 8FF4 FA69
    Good judgement comes with experience. Unfortunately, the experience
usually comes from bad judgement.