Re: Balsa with-gnome option

[Peter Bloomfield <PeterBloomfield bellsouth net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/19/2017 04:03:15 PM Tue, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
> Hi Peter:
>
> Am 19.09.17 00:26 schrieb(en) Peter Bloomfield:
…
> > Of these, (1) seems reasonable. (2) might be better implemented as a separate option like 
> > '--with-password-manager = libsecret | gnome-keyring | internal' (Balsa does have its own private config file 
> > for passwords), as there is no apparent reason for tying it to the content of the .desktop files.
>
> I think this would be a good idea!  But now that you are clearing up - why should we keep the gnome-keyring 
> option at all?  I.e. “--with-libsecret” does exactly this, whereas “--without-libsecret” uses Balsa's 
> internal method (which might be improved; e.g. by encrypting the password cache with the GnuPG or S/MIME 
> public key when gpgme is available.  This might be a project for the future, though).

OK--yes, I see that libsecret is available even in Ubuntu trusty, so I guess there's no longer any need to 
keep gnome-keyring.

> > But (3) baffles me: GSettings is part of libgio, which is always used by Balsa. It does require a backend, but is 
> > there any setup where none is provided? If there is, we should have another option like '--enable-gsettings = yes 
> > | no", but I see no reason for tying it to --with-gnome.
>
> I fully agree with you that GSettings should not be linked to Gnome.  As we always require GIO, I would 
> suggest to always use it, without any configure option.

OK, will do.

Thanks for the thoughts!

Peter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iF0EARECAB0WIQS030wPRfNNA5alz3MfX9S1uSp09QUCWcGKKQAKCRAfX9S1uSp0
9YyjAJ9vUAZxcwEY5T9U1yIu97mlpOLT/ACgnnF08cRsi4+IMjADWXm0T1lEw/4=
=P0/N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----