New MiniLogin Release!

[image]

Well the 'eqemu team' from what I understand was not too encouraged with the new minilogin, I am waiting on them to decide the next course of action for the login server since from what I read they are considering that as one option. I would rather they made that decision first, but if things continue to stall like they have who knows.

[Angelox]

Well, Like I said nerf it down to one server on the LS.
Give me a good account system that doesn't require the old ip system . That's not asking for nothing other than an upgrade to the old Minilogin.
They can't feel threatened by that!

[image]

They didn't even like the idea that it authenticated user/pass.

Besides the point, if there was a public LS where you had unlimited accounts that anyone could get, it would be time for a login server list. I think if the LS is released to the public it should be a responsible release. Eg. there is some way for everyone to know about all login servers (that people host and want public), and some generic method for handling user accounts (this is more tricky and may not be possible). But a public server list would be key.

[Aergad]

Isnt the server discussion area for precisly that listing your servers?

PLEASE relase a minilogin that has a good number of users allowed me personally im with angelox i only want one world server and a good ammount of accounts allowed black hand of doom had over 700 accounts before the change to your minilogin

[Aergad]

oh one matter of note i tested the old minilogin theres no limit on users if there is supposed to be it doesnt work lol i made a ton of accounts and could login to one with a id of 199 in the database

[image]

Thats not really what I was getting at, some emulators have automatic server list that show user count and such. So you would have an 'active' list of login servers that you know are up.

[Aergad]

well that wouldnt be hard to make at all wouldnt really be any different then making a page for account registration cept the server list page pings the ls listed in the database and shows if its up or down pretty simple php script to be honest

[image]

No heh...

I am not talking some shared login server, likely if everyone had their own login it would be individual user/passwords (that is an issue). But what im saying is each individual LS will try uplinking with a stats server and upload their current users/world information. Then a website can populate all that out.

Just to make it easy for the userbase to find reliable login servers and such.

[Aergad]

I think if you gave people the option of autonomy (which obviously alot of people would like) from the "official" LS same as minilogin works now but with username and password authentication most people would still use the two public Loginservers, the only people that would change to the new improved minilogin would be people that either already use the currrent one or that are new users wanting a private server.

SoD has thier own login server and they are quite popular and autonomous they dont host anything on their ls but their own server and that is waht most people who want to use the minilogin option want i think.

[Aergad]

that makes sense I personally wouldnt want to host any more world servers then my own so a minilogin with one world and a healthy ammount of user accounts allowed would be ideal for me and i think angelox as well.

I dont really want the responsibility of worrying about other peoples uptime if that makes sense

[image]

Maybe if there was more community involvement on this decision I would agree with it more but at this point its a small percentage voicing their opinion about public LS. There seems to be a few that want to keep it the way it is but ofcourse with a more reliable central LS.

But I am not sure I totally agree this should be the decision of the elite either... just saying.

[Aergad]

Well most people have always used the public LS is the wayi understand it. Some prefer minilogin but im thinking that the people that use minilogin dont spend much time on the forums unless they are having a problem with it

Personally I dont see what their issue is with you releasing a decent updated minilogin personally I mean having done some googling it was yours to do with what you wish anyway originally. Even with unlimited accounts and 3 world servers its not like they would have to worry about competition from the general end user.

Like i said I think if you limit the world accounts to one only for minilogin then that should satisfy everyone, you have a new public LS opion up for the public ls users, and a good secure minilogin option for the minilogin users

But you are right It shouldnt be an elitist decision either

[Asram]

I'm with Angelox that an account-based (rather than IP-based) minilogin would be a great boon for the minilogin users. I don't think that's the part of the design that's causing the consternation though, right?

It's the effect of federating the servers and the potential problem of duplicate account names, right?

[neiv2]

Well, I'm trying to set up the minilogin, and think I've figured out the readme file so far; but I have a question about two instructions:

insert into login_accounts set name='username',password=md5("yourpassword"),user_ active=1;

I set the user_active field at 1, but I'm not sure just what specifically I need to put for the name and password. Are the above settings ('username' for name and md5("yourpassword") for password) literal strings to be entered into these fields, or do they represent variables? In other words, do I replace 'username' with my own username and md5("yourpassword") with my own password, or do I type these lines in as literal strings into the db? My guess is that these are variables, but "md5" just seems like a strange way to note a variable.

Also . . .

insert into login_worldservers set account='accountname',password='yourpassword',name ='Public Name';

Same question as before. Is 'accountname' my account, or is it a literal string of characters to be entered into the db? Same question for 'Public Name'.

I appreciate any help with this.

[Aergad]

you set them to whatever you want them to be they are not variables user_active must be set to 2 or you cant login makle sure you ONLY Change yourpassword to what you want the password to be DO NOT REMOVE md5("") that is the encryption of the password and MUST Be there