Re: [Evolution] Outlook does not like .asc signature

[Ian Scott <ian pairowoodies com>]

On Sat, 2002-12-14 at 23:35, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:
Ian:
> > With all due respect, 'Standards' is a tricky notion.  You can have
a
> > standard, but if there is even a large _Minority_ who don't use it,
then
> > the 'standard' means little.  Reality is such that standards are set
by
> > what is usable.  If it ain't usable, 'standards' don't mean a whole
lot.
>
Jeff:
> When I say standard, I mean IETF standard.
>
> The goal of this project is to be IETF standards compliant. If you
want
> something else, then you'll need to start your own project and/or join
> another project that aims for whatever it is you want.
Ian:
I would love to have that ability.  Unfortunately I'm not a programmer. 
My role is much different.  As mentioned below, I love Evolution and
believe that the developers have done a tremendous job.
> > I love Evolution.  But unfortunately, when it comes to signatures
and
> > encryption, it's very unusable with most of the people I communicate
> > with.  As much as I'd love to convince those people to switch to
Linux,
> > and even use Evolution, it's not going to happen any time soon.  
Jeff:
> There are several other ways around this (none of which involve them
> switching to Linux):
>
> 1. use gpg on the console and copy/paste to/from evolution
> 2. convince them to enable the PGP/MIME support in their NAi PGP
plugin
> (I hear that the NAi PGP 7 plugins support this - and would presume
that
> the PGP 8 plugins do too).
> 3. convince them to use Mozilla Mail and/or Eudora Pro which support
> PGP/MIME (or some other client)

Ian:

Sorry, but you don't seem to 'get it'.  I'm a user.  I love this
software.  I am simply providing you with input from a 'user' point of
view.  Reality is that I am not going to convince people to switch just
for me and what I like and love.  

My intent was not to get into an argument with you.  I thought perhaps
some other opinion and comments from a useability standpoint might be
helpful to you, if you're open minded to understand the issues some
people face.  

Jeff:
> 4. implement inline pgp for Evolution and send us a patch that meets
all
> requirements (refer to http://bugzilla.ximian.com bugs #17540 and
> #17541) - or just implement a patch that doesn't meet the requirements
> and use it for your own needs (or put it up on your website for other
> people to download and use) but don't bother sending us a patch.

I wish I could.  But I'm not a programmer, and my comments are from a
user's point of view, not a programmer's point of view. And as a paid
subscriber to Ximian.  I figured I could help out in someway by putting
my money and support to ongoing development because I really like what
Ximian has to offer, especially Evolution.   

> 5. give up on signing stuff and accept the fact that interoperability
> will just Never Happen (tm)

That is a most unfortunate attitude.  Wouldn't it be great if we could
have interoperability?  Are you interested in what users would like to
see?  Or do you think that only programmers that can write patches use
Evolution?
> > In the real world, usability is also a standard.  My income depends
on
> > being able to communicate with others via email.  As much as I'd
love to
> > be a rebel and argue with folks about whether they are using
software
> > that meets 'standards', it would be foolhardy of me to do that.  I'd
> > lose customers and clients that will end up going to someone who
uses
> > software that is easier for them to deal with on their end.  And in
the
> > end, this is the 'standard' that will become most important, whether
we
> > like it or not.  
>
> so don't argue it, and just accept the fact that they don't
interoperate
> and get on with your life by doing #1, #4 or #5 (your choice).

Heh.  Thanks for the advice.  Again, great attitude here.  :) No more
suggestions or issues from me.  One less person that will provide you
with input.  And, while I'm at it, I'll cancel my subscription to
Ximian, will not bother anymore with thoughts about recommending this to
my corporate clients.  You're right.  There are other choices. 

You really don't seem to get it.  I am sure you are frustrated with
comments from non programmer types like me, that don't know what the
hell we're doing, don't understand the issues you face, and just want
something that works for what we're trying to achieve.  

On the other hand, it's frustrating for users to hear this kind of
attitude from programmers - that old 'go find something else' or 'go do
it yourself' speech whenever someone points something out to them.  

I myself am willing to pay for the product or support it's development
in ways that I am able.  Creating patches is not something I can do. 
But if you want an email list where you just have a bunch of happy
programmers talking about patches and where everyone is happy, and
there's no input about what is frustrating from a USER point of view,
then... I guess I'm on the wrong list.  

Look, as I said.. I think Evolution is a GREAT piece of software, and
I'm really happy with most of it.  My comments above were not meant to
be taken personally by any developers.   I HAVE recommended it to
others, convinced others to use it, and thereby introduced a good number
of people to Ximian.  

This one issue though is a frustrating one, and I know I am not the only
user of Evolution to find it so.  But, you've told me exactly where you
stand, and that's enough information for me to now realize I've been
recommending the wrong thing to some.

Sorry for the rant, but my intent was not to argue it - rather provide
you with a different 'Outlook', so to speak :) (pun intended).