On 03:02 Sun 29 Oct , Marius Mauch wrote: > > Well, I don't really see a reason why one would want to encrypt those > mails. The only potentially sensitive information (package > name/version) is already contained in the subject and therefore > wouldn't be encrypted. And gpg support can be a bitch to maintain, so > I'd like to see the benefit before adding that feature. > > Marius >
You're right.Right now it can only be useful for paranoids using info in ELOG_CLASSES :) Well this patch can be a starting point if gpg support is needed some day.. -- Ali Polatel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> www.rootshell.be/~hawking gpg: 322FEACE fp: 7738 BAA0 834B 43BF 7C1E 22EA D14C 0688 322F EACE () ascii ribbon campaign - against html mail /\
pgpHev1FMRUbW.pgp
Description: PGP signature
