Re: New module - (session/authentication) seeking a name

2004-05-13 Thread jmiller
On Wed, 12 May 2004, David Nicol wrote: > > mine is > AIS::client > which I can rename to match the others if you come up > with a good name. > > I have not tested AIS::client with mp and presume it is > broken there. Turning www::authen::simple into an AIS > client would allow you to centralize y

Re: Duplicated modules

2004-05-13 Thread Mark Stosberg
On Thu, May 13, 2004 at 07:38:51PM -0400, Randy W. Sims wrote: > > It would be much nicer if [perlmonks] was readable as a nntp or at least a > mailing list; I've always found http-based discussion boardss awkward to > navigate and difficult to figure out what I have and haven't read. > Wonder

Re: Duplicated modules

2004-05-13 Thread Randy W. Sims
On 5/13/2004 7:19 PM, IvorW wrote: - Original Message - From: "Jose Alves de Castro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "IvorW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 13 May 2004 11:23 Subject: Re: Duplicated modules Having said that, are we just reinventing Perlmonks? That, I do not k

Re: Duplicated modules

2004-05-13 Thread IvorW
- Original Message - From: "Jose Alves de Castro" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "IvorW" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: 13 May 2004 11:23 Subject: Re: Duplicated modules > > > Having said that, are we just reinventing Perlmonks? > > That, I do not know... :-| Ah, you do no

Re: New module - (session/authentication) seeking a name

2004-05-13 Thread David Nicol
mine is AIS::client which I can rename to match the others if you come up with a good name. I have not tested AIS::client with mp and presume it is broken there. Turning www::authen::simple into an AIS client would allow you to centralize your authentication. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] I know you, jun

Re: Duplicated modules

2004-05-13 Thread Jose Alves de Castro
> Right, let's JFDI. Anyone want to host a wiki and stick a module authors FAQ on it? If that's the way to go, we're hosting a new wiki right now on http://www.perl-hackers.net/ (check it out) and we could put it there, of course. > Having said that, are we just reinventing Perlmonks? That, I do