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

[Not Zed <notzed ximian com>]

No, please do not do that.

Have the setting in the settings page, don't prompt every time (it would
be very annoying).

The setting might be 'clear sign (if possible)' since you can't
clearsign non-text parts.

On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 20:14 -0600, Bohumir Jelinek wrote:
> > > > 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.
> > 
> > I agree with above ...
> > 
> > So how you sign the mail should just be a configuration option in the
> > gpg security settings. Default should be for pgp/mime.
> > 
> User can choose: "nothing", "sign", "encrypt" or "sign+encrypt"
> combinations in the "Security menu" configuration.
> 
> ***Then***, if the "Security menu" configuration says "sign" and user
> hits "Send", mailer program checks if the message is simple "plain
> text".  If the message is simple "plain text", this pop-up window will
> appear:
> 
>   "PGP signature of plain text message can be inlined.
>                          Inline?"
> 
>      -> Default answer was "Yes", but I can change it to "No". I was
>         considering to add option of always using "mime" or "inline"
>         for plain text message to gconf, thus pop-up window would not
>         show up every time.
> 
> -Bohumir
> _______________________________________________
> Evolution-patches mailing list
> Evolution-patches lists ximian com
> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution-patches