On 2006-11-13 05:27, Peter Jeremy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Sun, 2006-Nov-12 12:14:31 +0100, Marc Fonvieille wrote: >> SSH is the protocol, and ssh is the application/program (so >> <application></application> or <command></command> according to the >> situation). > > To be pedantic, the application is OpenSSH.
Well, right now, yes. But it is "a member of the family of applications which implement the `SSH' protocol". I am not saying that this can actually happen real soon now, but if OpenSSH doesn't work the way we want it to work, it is possible that our <application>SSH</application> in a few years will be <application>FooSSH</application>. When the 'Open' part of 'OpenSSH' is important, it is obligatory that we mention and make it stand out (if not for any other reason, as a form of our appreciation for the work of the OpenSSH folks). But when we talk about the 'SSH' protocol in general, do we really have to do so? - Giorgos _______________________________________________ cvs-all@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
