On Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 02:40:25 +0100, Niels M�ller wrote:
> PAM support is on the TODO list. But that was not quite what I was
> thinking of. As far as I know, PAM is still password authentication,
> although a better and more flexible interface than the traditional
> functions (but I haven't read the PAM docs yet).
Please look at the PAM documentation. Using PAM means one doesn't have to
deal with a system's specific password setup (shadow or not, DES or MD5SUM,
NIS, NIS+). From http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/libs/pam/modules.html it
looks to me that it isn't bound to password authentication.
On Tue, Dec 01, 1998 at 18:28:41 -0800, Daniel E. Eisenbud wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 02, 1998 at 02:40:25AM +0100, Niels M�ller
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Anonymous read-only CVS access is very important, I think.
> > A agree. Do you think an http interface is good enough, for now, or is
> > it crucial that it is accessible with the plain cvs client?
>
> Personally, if I were working on the code, I would want to check out a
> current copy, and then I would email you any patches by hand. So actually
> being able to use the client would be pretty important.
I agree with Daniel. To me, http access would be a nice gimmick; regular CVS
access is the important thing.
Ray
--
UNFAIR Term applied to advantages enjoyed by other people which we tried
to cheat them out of and didn't manage. See also DISHONESTY, SNEAKY,
UNDERHAND and JUST LUCKY I GUESS.
- The Hipcrime Vocab by Chad C. Mulligan
