[PATCH] support SSPI for Windows
Matt Mackall
mpm at selenic.com
Sun Apr 15 19:15:57 CDT 2012
On Sat, 2012-04-14 at 10:36 -0700, David Pope wrote:
> On Friday, December 2, 2011 4:41:58 PM UTC-5, Matt Mackall wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 2011-12-01 at 17:38 -0500, Chuck Kirschman wrote:
> > > # HG changeset patch
> > > # User Chuck.Kirschman
> > > # Date 1322778699 18000
> > > # Branch stable
> > > # Node ID 6f36523ce8fc00d836770a1a0f481df0ed27983f
> > > # Parent 351a9292e430e35766c552066ed3e87c557b803b
> > > enable sspi for windows
> > > This patch will add SSPI capabilities for both normal http and
> > ui.usehttp2=true
> > > configurations of Mercurial on Windows. The check for the authorization
> > failure
> > > has to happen at the point of opening the connection and resolved at
> > that time.
>
> I'm hoping Sune or Henrik can comment on this as they've already done
> > some work in this area. I suspect we may want to put some of this in an
> > extension. I understand there are issues here with keeping persistent
> > connections that we might want to tackle on their own first (ie there's
> > too much stuff for one patch here).
> >
> Hello all,
>
> Have the Windows volunteers (Sune, Henrik, ...?) had a chance to look at
> this, or further their own work in the area?
Not that I know of.
> I and my company are keenly
> interested in having SSPI built into Mercurial. We don't want to risk
> having developers put their domain passwords in their hgrc files, and our
> current VCS supports SSPI out-of-the-box so it's one more hurdle for the
> switchover. Keyring feels like a band-aid and doesn't help our credibility
> when advocating the switch.
> I saw the recent discussion about the volunteer nature of Mercurial
> development, which makes perfect sense. If bodies are needed for testing
> or developing, I'd be happy to help. I've done some minor SSPI-related
> development in the deep murky past, although I doubt that's what's needed
> here.
Your best bet is to pester Chuck into posting his patch again, giving it
a spin, and giving feedback. Until then, not much is likely to happen.
> (PS, I'm posting using Google Groups despite advice to the contrary, since
> otherwise I would have had to manually create something approximating a
> quoted reply (since I just joined the list). The bad things mentioned in
> "list etiquette" don't seem to have happened; crossing my fingers...)
Unsuccessful.
--
Mathematics is the supreme nostalgia of our time.
More information about the Mercurial-devel
mailing list