Michal Maczka wrote: >>I really don't appreciate this kind of name reuse - sftp is a protocol >>registered by the IETF (tcp/115). It was rather silly of JCraft to use >>that name for their scp implementation. Let's do better than them and >>have JavaScpDeployer (and possibly ExternalScpDeployer, if we want to >>keep it for whatever reasons).
> There is misunderstanding here. > > SCP and SFTP are clearly two different things, and JSCH supports them both, > > Every host which runs SSH2 Protocol suite provides bunch of different > services. scp and sftp are just two of them. > > More about SFTP: > http://ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-secsh-filexfer-04.txt > > > SCP has really pure functionality comparing to SFTP. > Specially JCraft implementation of sftp is as easy to use as commons-net ftp > provider. > > Bob has checked yesterday and both ibiblio and codehause are supporting > SFTP. > > I believe that from the point of view of the end user there is no difference > if deployer is working over SSH and actually uses scp or sftp. > > > I can reincarnate SCP deployer, but SFTP seems more accurate to use. Thanks for your explainations. I didn't really bother to check the information that I've had (except for /etc/services file). Now I've browsed the RFC and read the manpages, I actually know what I am talking about :-). SFTP seems to be more aropriate for deployments, and should be supported by any host running reasonably modern ssh package (protocol version 2). I still think that we might want to keep scp+ssh deployer for people that need to deploy to a server they don't control that has outdated/ misconfigured ssh server. R. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
