Re: [Evolution-hackers] ssl always/when-possible/never etc proposal

[Not Zed <notzed ximian com>]

On Mon, 2004-08-23 at 16:06 -0400, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:

Since there was confusion again today on the difference between always/whenever-possible, I guess it's a good time to bring this up.

I was thinking in the future, we could re-work the UI for the SSL options to look something more like this:



This would make the backend logic a little simpler too, because we would haven't try and guess which SSL method to use based on trial-and-error.

This seems very technical/meaningless, i dont even know what it means.

IMHO we should have SSL and TLS separated, they're different.  "whenver possible" makes absolutely zero sense technically or visibly since it doesn't relate to what it appears to be at face value.

i.e. something to the effect of:

Security: None / TLS / SSL

which is what we really mean.

Users will NEVER understand the difference since the system is ill-defined and ambiguous to start with.  But having 'ssl' when we really mean 'tls' will never help.  If we use the ssl port rather than starttls then we're doing ssl, not tls.

I think adding another option will just make it more confusing, it should be in the dropdown menu.

DanW suggested that we default to Whenever Possible rather than Never when we get around to changing the UI.

this'd require some changes to all of the remote mail providers (smtp, imap, pop, nntp, etc) but I don't think it'd take more than a day or 2 to make the necessary code changes and test everything.

it'd also require an additional setting option in the uri/e-account stuff, but that should be trivial to add too?

Jeff

-- 
Jeffrey Stedfast
Evolution Hacker - Novell, Inc.
fejj ximian com  - www.novell.com

--

Michael Zucchi <notzed ximian com> "born to die, live to work, it's all downhill from here" Novell's Evolution and Free Software Developer