On Fri, 25 Mar 2016 15:32, b...@pagekite.net said: > This is a chicken-and-egg problem. Until the tool is made widely > available, people will not use it - most people don't even know
It is actually a tool to help with gpgme development. However, Ben Kibbey seems to be using it for some of his software which is the reason for the XML output stuff. I have mentioned it only because we are evaluating ways to interact with web browsers and gpgme-tool might be useful to prototype a Native Messaging based browser extension. > This is one of the complaints/wishes us Mailpile folks had, for > some sort of stable socket/stdio-based programmatic API for > talking to GnuPG. This sort of interface would make it much more A socket based interface exists for years if you are going to use the UI-server approach we are using in Kleopatra, GpgOL and GpgEX. gpgme even provides high level access functions. If you want to try this you need an UI server (Kleopatra, GPA, or whatever you want to write) and then test it with gpg-connect-agent --uiserver (try the "HELP" command) A stdio based interfaces exists for more than 20 years. For example gpg can be used as a drop-in replacement for mutt's pgp support. But be aware that a stdio based interface has several problems which you can only solve with several channels or at least descriptor passing. > Requiring that a ruby, python or node.js dev know to install > GnuPG from the C sources and build this tool is a non-starter, They only need to install their language binding for GPGME. > So pretty please, ship it! :-) It is not useful right now. Salam-Shalom, Werner -- Die Gedanken sind frei. Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
