On 9/19/07, Marty Alchin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 9/18/07, Johan Bergström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Since FTP and SFTP are so closely related i still think that the 'why' > > or 'how do i' would show more often than not if FTP was omitted. My > > view of frameworks is generally based on DRY - but i guess at some > > point it is wiser to pick 'better' (in this case more secure) instead > > of 'most common'. > > Well, there's nothing saying you have to violate DRY. In this case, > the simple solution is to write an FTP backend and simply release it > to the public. Then nobody has to reinvent the wheel if they want FTP > support. Just don't expect the Django documentation to provide any > links to it, you'll likely be on your own there.
Is that not violating DRY in itself there? I mean we're gonna end up with alot of people writing the documentation with it, just as much as writing the FTP module itself. I think this is something where we're always going to have the "recommended" option and the "unsafe" but it just needs to be stated explicitly in the documentation, anyway if its written correctly, the documentation should only need something to say "FTP support is available, but it is highly recommended developers use SFTP instead, as it is a much secure, safe option." There's going to be alot of people using shared hosting environments where SFTP isn't going to be an option for them. Michael --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to django-developers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
