Re: Update (was: File_Apache)
| From: | Michael Wallner | Date: | Sun, 14 Sep 2003 14:21:11 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: Update (was: File_Apache) | ||
| References: | 1 2 | Groups: | php.pear.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to pear-dev+get-21488@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Mika Tuupola, you wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Sep 2003, Michael Wallner wrote:
>
>> However I will wait for Mika's review.
>
> Just a quick note. The idea of course is to merge extra
> features into current File_HtAccess, not to completely replace
> the old one.
Hm, do you see any obstacles?
I think it would be much less work, but if you cannnot agree to
this, we'll have to find another way :)
> Why not just improve current File_Passwd to support the
> missing features and windows platform (even by using htpasswd
> binary when needed). The current class needs some facelifting
> anyway.
Well, let me try to explain:
I think it is not a bad idea for having lightweight, robust and
for their purpose optimized *several* classes for managing
different password files. This would be easier for users and
maintainers of the classes, IMHO.
File_Passwd seems mostly useless on Win32, but not File_HtPasswd
and File_HtDigest. File_Passwd uses only crypt() AND it also uses
php's constant CRYPT_SALT_LENGTH wich returns 12 (used for
md5-crypt) on Win32, although you would probably like to get DES
encrypted (with 2-char salts) passwords. This issues could be
probably solved within a 'face-lifting' of the class but has
hardly anything to do with htpasswd files.
In my eyes it seems more like a File_CVSPasswd...
>> *HtGroup*
>
> This looks fines. Although I'd change the name to singular
> File_HtGroup. Now it is plural File_HtGroups. Singular names
> are usually preferred. The default parameter for constructor
> could be $file='.htgroup' instead of empty default. Also the
> example you have second parameter:
Sorry for that, should now all be fixed.
> +1 with the name File_HtGroup
Well this is my very first +1 in PEAR :)
> At a quick glance looks ok too.
Thanks,
Michael
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (Cygwin)
iD8DBQE/ZHlX3645gzRPvy8RAq+RAJ9i2BPFhpvLfBFnaOZ4rxWVUbr1NQCfdQaH
hnVK6+KSMrAN7OKzhFfoS5M=
=3Sbc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----