On ds, 2002-12-14 at 20:54, Ed Weinberg wrote: [...] > Unfortunatley when one mail program is used by so many people, bugs > become features. This week, we can't fight this. That means that we > either need to use tools that that can inter-operate with those bugs or > not participate on the Internet. > > There is no reason that a PGP signature needs to be sent as an > attachment. Evolution has got to be changed to add a code block at the > end of the message.
Hi,
I'm merely a happy evolution user but I'd like to express my opinion on
this subject.
I believe using PGP/MIME is superior to inline signature for the
following reasons:
* attachments are signed/encrypted
* the email is cleaner (specially when quoting emails which were
signed...)
* you can use non-ascii characters in text
Drawbacks:
* There are programs that don't support it yet (which is a thing that
it's changing now...) and it's annoying for people using them to open
the attachment.
* In mailing lists archives using www you often lose the signatures...
That Outlook thing is just a bug in Outlook. You can workaround that
using a PGP relay software (which works between your server and your
email client and can encrypt/sign and decrypt/verify your email if your
email client doesn't support gpg/pgp). The link:
http://sites.inka.de/tesla/gpgrelay.html
BTW, are you sure there isn't any way to disable that behaviour
(deleting attachments) in Outlook? It's seems a very agressive (not to
say silly) thing to do!
Regards,
--
Josep Mon�s i Teixidor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Clau GnuPG: http://www.arrakis.es/~jmones/gpg/jmones_myrealbox_com.asc
Empremta digital: A9E1 218C FFDD 9CAA C44F 0A89 0F73 0021 6BF8 919B
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
