On 2017-09-16 16:10:13, Holger Levsen wrote:
> Hi anarcat,
>
> sorry for not replying earlier…
>
> On Thu, Sep 01, 2016 at 02:46:40PM -0400, anarcat wrote:
>> > I've read the package description and while I like the funny tone, I
>> > also find it confusing for two reasons:
>> >
>> > 1.)
>> >
>> > monkeysign is a tool to overhaul the OpenPGP keysigning experience
>> > and bring it closer to something that most primates can understand.
>> > [...]
>> > Monkeysign is the commandline signing software.
>> >
>> > -> most primates can't understand commandline software?!
>>
>> That is correct. What do you find find confusing here?
>
> how a command line tool is something most primates can understand. I thought
> we
> agreed most don't.
Monkeysign is the project as a whole, and it has both a commandline
interface and graphical interface.
So it is assumed primates can use one or the other at least.
>> > 2.)
>> >
>> > The project makes use of cheap digital cameras and the type of bar
>> > code known as a QRcode to provide a human-friendly yet still-secure
>> > keysigning experience.
>> > [...]
>> > Monkeysign is the commandline signing software, a caff
>> > replacement.
>> >
>> > -> is it a caff replacement or does it rely on QRcodes?
>>
>> It's funny that you quote only the first sentence of that paragraph, the
>> full paragraph is:
>>
>> Monkeysign is the commandline signing software, a caff
>> replacement. Monkeyscan is the graphical user interface that scans
>> qrcodes.
>>
>> So Monkeysign is the caff replacement, and monkeyscan is the GUI.
>
> yes, but the first two paragraphs are confusing: the very first word
> of the description is "monkeysign" but now I believe it's used for both
> monkeysign and monkeyscan(?). The 2nd paragraph OTOH seems to be about
> monkeyscan(?) while it hasnt been mentioned yet. The 3rd paragraph
> is probably about monkeyscan as well - this is totally unclear.
there's an issue open to merge the two binaries. I just haven't figured
out how best to do that right now, and i mostly use the commandline
binary for now.
keep in mind the description includes the goals of the project, which
may or may not be completed...
>> I would appreciate a suggestion on how to phrase this better. With the
>> above, I am not sure I can find a proper formulation that would be
>> satisfactory.
>
> better now?
well, can you provide a patch or some more explicit wording?
>> > Also it might be appropriate to explain that monkeysign is a
>> > commandline tool, just like caff or pius… (and that only monkeyscan
>> > does all the monkey QR stuff and therefore has a gui…
>> Again, I felt that the last paragraph did exactly that.
>
> can one use monkeysign without monkeyscan? the other way round?
yes, both.
a.
--
People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
People in glass cities shouldn't fire missiles.
- Bansky
