Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

support for subdirectory-based multiple keys #41

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

support for subdirectory-based multiple keys #41

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

lacides
Copy link

@lacides lacides commented Mar 4, 2013

Hi,
Just as it says on the tin. I need this feature for one of my projects. I'm happy to discuss about any edge cases I may have missed or about any feedback provided.

Lacides

@wingrunr21
Copy link
Owner

Howdy,
Any reason for a Simple SSH key over just using the original SSH key? I think I'd prefer one object (especially since the difference between the two is not clear) that maintains backwards compatibility.

Otherwise, looks solid.

@lacides
Copy link
Author

lacides commented Mar 18, 2013

Hey,
Sorry for the delay.
I really didn't have a particular reason for using a new class, I guess I just thought it'd be easier to write. I'm cool with rewriting it so it uses the original class, though I don't see how the new class breaks backwards compatibility.

@wingrunr21
Copy link
Owner

Less concerned about the backwards compatibility and more that there are two SSHKey objects without any real distinction. I'd prefer one SSHKey object and if child-objects are needed to properly manage nesting then those can be utilized that way.

@lacides
Copy link
Author

lacides commented Apr 1, 2013

I understand. So, I just went and used the original SSHKey class (didn't use a child object) by adding an instance variable to indicate nesting. Let me know what you think.

@n-rodriguez
Copy link

Hi there!

Any news on this PR?
I have pull requests to submit (remove chdir, use last version of Gitlab-grit, etc...), can I send them?

Thank you!

@wingrunr21
Copy link
Owner

@n-rodriguez I'm not actively maintaining this gem any longer. If this PR seems to do the job I'm ok with merging it.

Go ahead and send other PRs. I'll look them over.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants