Hi!
On Fri, Mar 03, 2000 at 10:36:14AM -0500, Alec Habig wrote:
> However, for a stable-version mutt, it would be best to have the
> default/recommended setup be as straightforward as possible. If one
> doesn't have the need to make old signatures, then there should be no
> need to require an external dependency on a script which asks
> individual users to do customizations. If someone wants to do old
> signatures, then having the current setup commented out but available
> for intrepid souls is a good idea.
I mostly agree. Preparing another gpg-2comp.rc is IMO better than
working with comments. I expect room for optimizing the rc file and
the gpg-2comp script for use with mutt-1.1/1.2 .
> If I'm managing a multi-user system and want to do an upgrade to
> mutt-1.2, it should be as simple as having users source a new system rc
> file. At the very least, including the gpg-2comp script in the mutt
> install would make life easier, although for people who don't need it,
> requiring the invocation of an extra perl script for each signing is
> rather wasteful.
Unfortunately I don't see any way to determine good default values
for the required PGP2-interoperating parameters. Therefore the users
must do the configuration by themselves to keep a minimum of
transparency.
I don't think that indications to use the script are common enough to
include it in the distribution.
Gero
