On Sat, Apr 07, 2012 at 07:48:56PM +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote: > Apart from Mika... in which case he's best to not sign his posts and > claim his account was hijacked by an idiot.
Now thats uncalled for. My point was, that Mika's posts are difficult to read as it is (because he doesn't trim them) without all that extra "stuff" at the end. I haven't read all the thread yet, so bearing that in mind, I think it is fine to sign your emails. In fact, many developers¹ do and I can see good reason to. Mika: Is it possible to sign your mail *without* sending the whole key² as well or is that another problem with enigmail? Ahhh... wait a minute. .... "Enigmail is capable of signing, authenticating, encrypting and decrypting email. Additionally, it supports both the inline PGP format, as well as the PGP/MIME format as described in RFC 3156." If you change to the newer PGP/MIME format and see ² hopefully that should at least halve your post content. ¹ Although most tend to use mutt which uses gnupg. ² If that is in fact what it is; I suggest uploading your key to a keyserver, and just publishing the fingerprint. -- "Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet." -- Napoleon Bonaparte -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120408014003.GB19625@tal
