openssh unix dev - Sep 2004 - Can anyone help enabling ssh in foxfire... like konqueror

https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=261479

above is a link to a feature request for the foxfire/mozilla browser...
I asked them to add support for doing ssh and sftp file transfers in the 
browser window
but they dont think ssh or sftp is important... sort of acted as if they 
were too lazy or
couldnt do it because it was alot of work...
I am hoping that the developers who are more involved with ssh could 
mabye help these guys out
or write an extention for the browser to support these protocals...

Thanks
email me at
pkruger at speeduneed.com
if you can help

Paul Kruger wrote:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=261479
I agree with what the Mozilla developers said - ssh/sftp support is best
provided via an extension.
> above is a link to a feature request for the foxfire/mozilla browser...
> I asked them to add support for doing ssh and sftp file transfers in the 
> browser window
> but they dont think ssh or sftp is important... sort of acted as if they 
> were too lazy or
You won't win any support by calling developers lazy.

On Wed, 29 Sep 2004, Paul Kruger wrote:
> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=261479
>
> above is a link to a feature request for the foxfire/mozilla browser...
> I asked them to add support for doing ssh and sftp file transfers in the
> browser window
> but they dont think ssh or sftp is important... sort of acted as if they
> were too lazy or
> couldnt do it because it was alot of work...
> I am hoping that the developers who are more involved with ssh could
> mabye help these guys out
> or write an extention for the browser to support these protocals...
>

] do you use a 3rd party ftp client so that foxfire can implement ftp?
] http, https, ftp, sftp, ssh, and smb - should all work in any browser
] window.

Comparing ftp to sftp is rather unfair.  ftp protocol for all its stupid
design flaws is 1000x easier to implement right than sftp + subset of the
underlying ssh protocol.  For do note you need to do *BOTH* in order
to have a working sftp.

As for fish:// you need even more of an underlying ssh support (Frankly,
fish:// should die a horrible death, IMNSHO).

I think Darin is right that relying on the Gnome VFS, KDE Message API or
even Microsoft's own Explorer Shell support for implementing more advanged
integration features makes more sense.  You can't seriously think Mozilla
group can mantain a full samba port, ssh port, etc.

- Ben