Re: [Evolution] Re: GPG signatures

["Mike Leone" <turgon mike-leone com>]

> The workaround to this problem with inline signatures is to make the
> message and the signature separate MIME parts and specify that their
> contents are opaque. But then it is up to the mail client to recognize
> the "Content-type: multipart/signed" and the "Content-disposition:
> inline" MIME headers so it gets displayed as something other than a
> couple of attachments, yet still can be verified as a signed message.
> And that's where somebody gets to write and submit a patch  for
> Evolution.

How is that a patch for Evolution .. to make the OTHER client see the message as something more than 2 
sttachments (which is how Outlook Express sees GPG signed stuff)? Wouldn't the Evo patch make Evo NOT send as 
"Content-type: multipart/signed" and the "Content-disposition: inline" MIME headers? Which would then not 
render it opaque?

I'm confused.