Hi Dan, I dedicated an most of the blog post to answering that question (why it breaks Mailpile), did you not read it or did I fail to communicate?
- Bjarni On 28 Feb 2015 12:44, "Daniel Kahn Gillmor" <d...@fifthhorseman.net> wrote: > On Fri 2015-02-27 07:19:41 -0500, Bjarni Runar Einarsson <b...@pagekite.net> > wrote: > > I think you misunderstood my complaint. I don't mind if the agent is a > > persistance daemon that provides GPG-related services, that's all well > > and good. It's good process separation and I have no problem with that. > > > > My gripe with the agent, is the agent is controlling the UI of > > authentication. This breaks Mailpile, and this is one of the key areas > > where GnuPG crosses the imaginary line between library/utility and > > "application". Fixing this was point 1. in my list of suggestions and > > explaining why it was necessary was the bulk of the post. > > The only part of the UI that the agent controls is prompting the user > for use of the key, and passphrase entry upon unlock. > > Why does this break mailpile? I prefer the agent to have separate UI > from the tool that uses the agent, because i want don't want tools that > use the agent to be able to mask the agent's UI. > > I'm quite happy that enigmail (for example) appears to be dropping plans > for non-agent use of secret key material. this should be a simplifying > change, and it should make it easier for systems to integrate OS-level > prompting and feedback to the user independent of which application uses > the secret key store. > > --dkg >
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
