maven-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rafal Krzewski <>
Subject Re: cvs commit: maven/src/plugins-build/artifact project.xml
Date Wed, 25 Jun 2003 08:27:47 GMT
Michal Maczka wrote:
>>I really don't appreciate this kind of name reuse - sftp is a protocol
>>registered by the IETF (tcp/115). It was rather silly of JCraft to use
>>that name for their scp implementation. Let's do better than them and
>>have JavaScpDeployer (and possibly ExternalScpDeployer, if we want to
>>keep it for whatever reasons).

> There is misunderstanding here.
> SCP and SFTP are clearly two different things, and JSCH supports them both,
> Every host which runs SSH2 Protocol suite provides bunch of different
> services. scp and sftp are just two of them.
> More about SFTP:
> SCP has really pure functionality comparing to SFTP. 
> Specially JCraft implementation of sftp is as easy to use as commons-net ftp
> provider.
> Bob has checked yesterday and both ibiblio and codehause are supporting
> I believe that from the point of view of the end user there is no difference
> if deployer is working over SSH and actually uses scp or sftp.
> I can reincarnate SCP deployer, but SFTP seems more accurate to use.

Thanks for your explainations. I didn't really bother to check the
information that I've had (except for /etc/services file). Now I've
browsed the RFC and read the manpages, I actually know what I am talking
about :-). SFTP seems to be more aropriate for deployments, and should
be supported by any host running reasonably modern ssh package (protocol
version 2).
I still think that we might want to keep scp+ssh deployer for people
that need to deploy to a server they don't control that has outdated/
misconfigured ssh server.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message