Re: [evolution-patches] Mailer bug #127521: Inline PGP support for evolution (part A: only sending)

[Bohumir Jelinek <bj48 ra msstate edu>]

> no no no... I'd prefer you add a menu item to specifically clearsign.
>
I respect your opinion, and I can follow the orders. It is enough to
say that you do not intend to discuss, and I can simply do what you
suggest (add new menu item for the "clearsign").


But while working on implementation, I found that:

 1) You suggest (correct me if I am wrong) three options in the
    Security menu:

   [x] clearsign
   [x] sign
   [x] encrypt

      -> There is a lot of uncertainity with these three options,
	 since the first two options are exclusive, and the
	 exclusiveness is not obvious from the menu (if you suggest
	 menu with three equivalent options ...).

         E.g. it is not clear what should happen if user chooses first
	 two options together. I am also not sure if the choice of
	 "clearsign and encrypt" is well defined. Actually there are 8
	 possible combinations of (yes/no) options alltogether in the
	 menu with three items.

	 It either allows user to do something stupid (and that can
	 generate a lot of support requests), or it needs an extensive
	 checking and testing of the code.

 2) I suggest to offer two simple options in "Security" menu:

   [x] sign
   [x] encrypt

       -> These two options are not exclusive, since any message can
          be both signed and encrypted. Any combination of these two
          options makes well defined sense. Later, when user hits
          "Send" (and only in the case it is appropriate - fro a plain
          text message), clearsign option is offered by prompt. There
          is no uncertainity and all GPG sign/encryp options that I am
          familiar with are covered. It is simpler and unambiguous - I
          would go with it.


-Bohumir