Dave McCaldon wrote: > > Or are you suggesting that all authentication failures (as > > opposed to other errors such as sending failures) should share an > > error code regardless of the authentication method used? > > As I understood it, this was Peter's suggestion.
It was meant as an idea, sort of a call for comments. I certainly did not intend to suggest that it was the prefered solution. Sorry for the confusion! The reason that I didn't just commit your patch has nothing to do with form and everything to do with my gut feeling that this handling should probably be thought about and discussed some more. I don't think that sending new variations of the patch is neccessarily the fastest way forward until we've nailed how it should work. :) > In any case, if I can get a final opinion from the group on this, > I'm happy to implement it. Let's figure it out first. Please be patient and comment a lot on all the good and bad ideas. The thought that occured to me before was that we might need to take a bit of a stand in libssh2 here on whether it should provide error codes that are close to the protocol errors (which I would prefer) or whether it should try to be smart and cook protocol error codes into something that could be expected that application writers would prefer, or just where we think that protocol errors suck. Personally I rather like the protocol but on the other hand maybe it's too low level sometimes? I absolutely agree that this failure path needs to be covered, but that doesn't mean it's simple to produce a "final opinion". //Peter _______________________________________________ libssh2-devel http://cool.haxx.se/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libssh2-devel
