On Thu, 09 Mar 2006, David Shaw wrote:
> Let's make it simpler: I just added the ability to delete notations
> directly by using a minus sign prefix like "[EMAIL PROTECTED]".
>
> Given these notations:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> if you use "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" you'll delete that specific
> notation. If you use "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" you'll delete all three.
>
> > Also, is issuing a notation again with the same key supposed to replace
> > an existing notation, or should it - as it does now - add a second
> > notation with the same key?
>
> I went back and forth on this a few times, as I can see a good
> argument for either replacement or adding a second notation, but
> finally went with the current behavior as more flexible. It's easy
> enough to change if it doesn't work out well in the field. Note that
> this only applies to key matches. Adding a completely matching
> notation (both key and value) is skipped.
Thanks, this looks very good now. I don't think the fact that one
cannot add notation keys that start with a dash will be very relevant
in practice.
Cheers,
Peter
--
PGP signed and encrypted | .''`. ** Debian GNU/Linux **
messages preferred. | : :' : The universal
| `. `' Operating System
http://www.palfrader.org/ | `- http://www.debian.org/
_______________________________________________
Gnupg-users mailing list
Gnupg-users@gnupg.org
http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
