On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 01:56, Ralph Sanford wrote: > On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 21:15, Michael Leone wrote: > > On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 09:31, Michael Rothwell wrote: > > > On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 20:04, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote: > > > > I have just recently rewritten support for gnupg using the --status-fd > > > > [...] > > > > Evolution 1.1.x. I would also like to know why you won't use gnupg. > > > > > > I don't know anyone who uses PGP anymore. Even people using crypto on > > > Windows are using gpg these days, in my limited experience. Plus, GPG is > > > free, portable, and available, whereas PGP is not free and has been 'end > > > of lifed,' so to speak. > > > > Then you should get out and meet more people. :-) > > > > I use PGP when on Windows, since there are no decent GPG plugins for my > > MUA (Pegasus). And I know of at least 2 others who use PGP on Windows. > > There's also no decent GUI for GPG on Windows, and most Windows users > > wouldn't know a command line if it bit them. :-) > > > > Have to agree with Michael on the use of PGP in windows. An end-user or > consumer type person using windows may use PGP, but is extremely > unlikely to use GPG or have even heard of GPG. > > In order to use evolution to communicate quickly and efficiently with > computer users (still more likely to be windows users), evolution and > GPG needs to be compatible with people who use email clients ranging > from outlook express, outlook, through to eudora, pegasus and pmmail. > Communicating with persons using evolution/GPG on linux is an extremely > small percentage of the world of computer users.
You're missing the point completely. You do not need to use PGP in Evolution to be compatable with people using other clients with PGP, GPG is PGP compatable and thus my question boils down to: Is there any reason to allow LINUX users to use pgp 5.0 or pgp 6.5.8 when they have gpg as a valid option (that is probably better in every way shape and form including support, since, well, pgp has none). > > Rather than any effort being made to rationalize any reduction in > compatibility between linux/evolution/GPG and the rest of world using > PGP, I would far prefer that ability of evolution users to communicate > with windows email clients be enhanced. Such as the ability to > seamlessly send encrypted attachments to the above named email clients. > BTW, we are not actually communicating with them if they can not open > the encrypted attachments seamlessly as well. > > I do not really want to get into a debate about the benefits of GPG vs > PGP or PGP in line quoting vs RFC compliance. I just want to be able to > use evolution to communicate seamlessly with the greatest number of > other email users. Surf on over to http://bugzilla.ximian.com, assign bugs 17540 and 17541 to yourself and get hackin' ;-) You also realise that Microsoft didn't write the PGP code used by Outlook, NAI did. And NAI is no longer supporting that stuff :-) The way I see it, that means we don't have to either. Jeff -- Jeffrey Stedfast Evolution Hacker - Ximian, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] - www.ximian.com _______________________________________________ evolution maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/evolution
