Re: [Evolution-hackers] Camel & smime
On Thu, 2002-06-06 at 13:49, Marc Jadoul wrote: > compatibility. And the missing features will do that no one will use it. For > instance, to use it I would need smart card support + mulitple email > address support (1 cert can only be used for 1 email adress) and separation > of signing/encrypting functionality in 2 certs (needed for qualified certs), Isn't this (1 cert can only be used for 1 email adress) more a political issue with CA's than technical? I think it is... after all, they'd be very happy to have you pay for a certificate per email address... Cheers, -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [Evolution-hackers] FTP sync, Please!
On Mon, 2002-04-01 at 04:57, JP Rosevear wrote: > On Sun, 2002-03-31 at 10:38, Yosi wrote: > > How hard is it to do a "rpm -ba " , get both the > > binary and the source packages and put them on the FTP site? > This is not the way it is done since we support rpm and debian. -ba or -ta, is the way you should build if you want to respect the GNU GPL. That way, the sources would be compatible with the binaries. It is important that that happens. Hugs, rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Ghandi + So let's do it...? signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
