I voted the post down for the general reason of "what's
the point?" In this case, your post was too brief
for me to get a 'point' out of it. I want a motive.
I wondered:
- What's the context? Why should we care that you
want this module? It might be nice (although I
think scp would be more useful), but
- Why are you telling us? Who is the intended
recipient of this message?
- Someone who could would write this module?
I expect most people write modules when they
need them, so it's unlikely you'll get a module
this way.
- Someone who agrees with you that it would
be nice, but can make no contribution toward
realizing that goal? Well, what's the point of
that? I would understand the point of a manisfesto
intended to make others agree with you, but
this is just a statement. It's like walking up
to someone on the street and saying, "World
peace would be nice." The person will probably
nod and agree, and once alone wonder why you
bothered to tell her/him so.
There you have it. I voted it down because it wasn't
clear to me what purpose it served, even after asking
a few other people. I will probably make fewer -- votes
of this type in the future because I originally started
making them because of the posting bonus, when it was
fairly safe to assume posts you couldn't see a point
to existed just to give their owner a little exp.
As to whether such a module exists, I have no idea as
it's not something I've ever looked for.
I have no problem with explaining my votes, but I prefer
to wait for a request to do so. Some people want to hear
it and some people don't.
Ps. osfameron, ssh is 'secure shell client', which
provides encrypted communication between two hosts
over an insecure network. scp ('secure copy') allows
encrypted data transfer.
| [reply] |
| [reply]
[d/l] |
I want to add that I think Net::SSH is a
great idea, and that I voted
your post ++.
Many times on perlmonks and in other
perl discussion forrums someone
recomends using part of the ssh
family (ssh, scp, etc...) to
do something on a remote machine
because of the security
afforded by the ssh protocol.
This is great, but then your perl
program has to launch a separate
process to do part of the work.
This separate process must be cared for,
monitored, and managed. It would be far
better to
have SSH protocols built-into
perl as a module.
Anyone who
think that there is no place for Net::SSH
probably enjoys using system to launch ftp
instead of using Net::FTP. Those are
not the kinds of programs I would want
to have to work with or maintain.
| [reply] |
Though I didn't -- this (and haven't yet used a -- vote...) I'd like to make just one point:
I don't know what 'ssh' is, nor what a net interface to it would be.Pardon my ignorance: I could, and probably should, look this up on Perlmonks, the hacker's dictionary or a number of other places, but then it is no longer a "Simple Prayer". (So I haven't bothered doing the research, though if anyone would care to de-ignorance me, I'd be obliged).
Cheerio!
Osfameron | [reply] |
SSH stands for Secure SHell. Think telnet, on angel dust, with an attitude, a hangover and nukes to fend off everyone else that didn't understand the phrase, "Go ahead, make my day".
Ciao,
Gryn
| [reply] |
