.htaccess uses the standard Unix crypt function to encrypt its passwords. But anyway, it was just an example of how things could be done wrt limiting access to the archives.
Saffron: He's my husband. Mal: Well, who in the damn galaxy ain't?
'Trash'
Buffistas Building a Better Board
Do you have problems, concerns or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.
PaulJ - Feb 24, 2003 10:47:41 am PST #3199 of 10000
§ ita § - Feb 24, 2003 10:49:44 am PST #3200 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
.htaccess uses the standard Unix crypt function to encrypt its passwords.
Is that MD5? Because that's how ours are stored.
PaulJ - Feb 24, 2003 10:51:49 am PST #3201 of 10000
Nope, they are different functions. And in that case, I'm afraid that this option isn't feasible, with MD5 being one-way and all that...
Let me check if there's any way to make .htaccess use MD5 passwords, though...
Edit: oh wait, there *is*. .htaccess uses by default crypt() passwords, but you can configure it to use MD5 too.
Anyway, these are all implementation details, and I'm sure something can be worked out in the end. The first decision to make, if I understand correctly, is still at a higher level...
P.M. Marc - Feb 24, 2003 11:06:27 am PST #3202 of 10000
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
How would the user table stay updated? Every time a new closed thread was ported, an update to the archives user table would be required.
Well, yeah. Basically. That would be how.
Update it when the archive is updated.
Edit: probably by using the most-up-to-date version at the time of archiving.
Kat - Feb 24, 2003 1:31:12 pm PST #3203 of 10000
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
I'm in voting mode:
I say option 1. It is what I'm used to so it might just be a familiarity thing.
§ ita § - Feb 24, 2003 1:50:02 pm PST #3204 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Update it when the archive is updated.
But the 100 users that joined between archives can't hit the site.
I still vote #1.
Jessica - Feb 24, 2003 1:57:20 pm PST #3205 of 10000
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
I vote 1, too.
P.M. Marc - Feb 24, 2003 2:01:27 pm PST #3206 of 10000
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
But the 100 users that joined between archives can't hit the site
Could also sync it twice a week, whatever makes it smoother.
P.M. Marc - Feb 24, 2003 2:03:33 pm PST #3207 of 10000
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
Alternate solution:
#1 for natter, etc.
Modified threadsuck (with #names) stored offsite for showthreads, Nillylinks updated to point to them, OR Leave closed showthreads on the main board, archive everything else #1 style.
§ ita § - Feb 24, 2003 2:05:47 pm PST #3208 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Hmm. Why don't we start with the modified #1? Zip and move Natters, leaving showthreads?
The problem with any synching, PMM, is that as far as I can tell, it has to be manual. As in not even with your average web app (since most hosts only allow programs running on their servers to access their DB).