Hello,
On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 08:14:47PM -0400, Tim Gray
wrote:
> encrypting a mutt draft in Vim. You encrypt it,
> then save the file, and once you are back in
> mutt, postpone the message. It worked fine, as
> long as you are ok with all the mail headers
> being encrypted and thus inaccessible
On Sep 09, 2013 at 02:31 AM +1000, Erik Christiansen wrote:
That would remove the editor choice restriction, and so would be more
universal once it exits. Added to that, draft encryption integrated
into mutt uses less keystrokes and requires less user concentration than
encryption provided by the
On Sunday 08 Sep 2013 17:31:43 Erik Christiansen wrote:
> On 08.09.13 14:59, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> > Vim certainly could and Emacs probably can encrypt. But what about Nano,
> > pico, mcedit, gedit, kate? Therefore, I think, it is still mutt's
> > responsibility to encrypt the file.
>
> G'da
On 08.09.13 14:59, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> Vim certainly could and Emacs probably can encrypt. But what about Nano,
> pico, mcedit, gedit, kate? Therefore, I think, it is still mutt's
> responsibility to encrypt the file.
G'day Christian,
That would remove the editor choice restriction, and
Hi Erik!
On So, 08 Sep 2013, Erik Christiansen wrote:
> On 07.09.13 14:40, Christian Brabandt wrote:
> > > No. Just because mutt encrypts for transmission does not obligate it to
> > > encrypt other files which might or might not later be transmitted.
> > > This is where you are conflating two se
