Barry Warsaw writes:
> On Aug 14, 2013, at 05:35 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>
> >[1] Has anybody else noticed that both gpg's UI and its documentation
> >seem designed to make it as hard to use as possible?
>
> Sadly, I think this is one of the biggest reasons why we've never
> seen w
On 13-08-14 2:35 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
Footnotes: [1] Has anybody else noticed that both gpg's UI and its
documentation seem designed to make it as hard to use as possible?
Not only have people noticed, but " Why Johnny Can't Encrypt: A
Usability Evaluation of PGP 5.0" is often require
I agree with everything written elsewhere by Steve and Richard.
On Aug 14, 2013, at 05:35 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
>[1] Has anybody else noticed that both gpg's UI and its documentation
>seem designed to make it as hard to use as possible?
Sadly, I think this is one of the biggest reasons
Abhilash Raj writes:
> After midterm evaluations I have been working on signing the message
> using one the keys associated with the list, now since `python-gnupg`
> does not allow selecting keys with key credentials( like address or
> list-name name)
Have you tried this? In the GPG document
