From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/49374 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andreas Fuchs Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: What method do *you* use for signing Usenet posts? Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:29:41 +0000 (UTC) Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: <87fzroachf.fsf@eris.void.at> References: <87d6mtf3tq.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net> <87znpwrjoa.fsf@unix.home> <87el78eqce.fsf@pooh.honeypot.net> <87hec4g22z.fsf@unix.home> <87k7h0af7g.fsf@eris.void.at> <87bs2cg0va.fsf@unix.home> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1043022657 22894 80.91.224.249 (20 Jan 2003 00:30:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2003 00:30:57 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from malifon.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.13]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18aPq3-0005x7-00 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:30:55 +0100 Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu ([129.7.128.10] ident=lists) by malifon.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 3.20 #1) id 18aPqc-0003bk-00; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 18:31:30 -0600 Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Sun, 19 Jan 2003 18:32:26 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from main.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.224.249]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA22058 for ; Sun, 19 Jan 2003 18:32:15 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from list by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18aPot-0005tw-00 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:29:43 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: ding@hpc.uh.edu Original-Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18aPos-0005tj-00 for ; Mon, 20 Jan 2003 01:29:42 +0100 Original-Path: not-for-mail Original-Lines: 35 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org Mail-Copies-To: never X-Url: http://asf.void.at/ X-Attribution: asf Cancel-Lock: sha1:qKJx4v9tILWzmQW4eCJO2SqbWBo= Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49374 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:49374 Today, Vasily Korytov wrote: > asf> I wonder - why does the user have to decide such things? Would > asf> it not make more sense to just specify the method and let gnus > asf> itself figure out whether it should use mime or not (i.e. if > asf> there is a mime part, use detached signatures, if not, use plain > asf> pgp)? > > IMHO, the user _has_ to decide it. For example, I prefer PGP/MIME for > mail, but when I use PGP for Usenet (I usually don't, but that's > another story), I want RFC1991 PGP. > > I can prefer having PGP/MIME for one recipient, and old style PGP for > another. IMHO, there is no way to prefer one over the other: If there are mime parts in the message, it should be signed as a multipart, and if there is no mime part in it, gnus should not put one in, for size and compatibility considerations. > It may be really useful, so why eliminating this option (why removing > options anyway -- it's the Outlook way, we all know, in what it > results)? I don't intend to rename a common option, I only suggested that the code be made to work as expected - secure a message and ensure that most receipients (even outlook users, stupid email gateways which don't grok mime) can read and decode it. > BTW, the behaviour, you want, can be made through hooks. Absolutely. But in my opinion, it's a reasonable default, so why not make it one? (-: -- Andreas Fuchs, , asf@jabber.at, antifuchs