Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-22 Thread Rejo Zenger
++ 19/04/15 13:30 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: I've just pushed the multiple crypt hook patch along with Dale's $crypt_confirmhook option. Please let me know if there are any issues. I have been using the nightly build for a couple of days now, it seems to work flawlessly. Thanks for your work

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-19 Thread Kevin J. McCarthy
Rejo Zenger wrote: > ++ 17/04/15 14:53 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: > > > >Another option could be something like: $crypt_use_hooks as a > >quadoption: > > - yes means all crypt-hooks are used without prompting > > - ask-yes/ask-no prompt for each hook > > - no disables all crypt-hooks. > >This could

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-18 Thread Rejo Zenger
++ 17/04/15 14:53 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: Another option could be something like: $crypt_use_hooks as a quadoption: - yes means all crypt-hooks are used without prompting - ask-yes/ask-no prompt for each hook - no disables all crypt-hooks. This could provide a way to disable the crypt-hook

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-17 Thread Kevin J. McCarthy
Rejo Zenger wrote: > ++ 04/04/15 11:54 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: > >However, I'm a little nervous to take away the prompt from everyone. It > >would be great if other crypt-hook users could chime in here. Is the > >prompt universally annoying? Is this worth an option? > > If you are asking me,

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-04 Thread Rejo Zenger
++ 04/04/15 11:54 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: So, actually, the current situation where mutt asks whether it should use the key specified with the crypt-hook is superflucious in my setup. If I have designated a specific key for a specific user using the hook, there is no need to ask me for a verif

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-04 Thread Kevin J. McCarthy
Rejo Zenger wrote: > ++ 04/04/15 16:33 +0200 - Rejo Zenger: > >I have specificaly selected and configured a number of key ID's for a > >mailinglist. This is a deliberate action, and if a key is not available > >there is no need to select an alternative. Keys are always > > So, actually, the curren

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-04 Thread Rejo Zenger
++ 04/04/15 16:33 +0200 - Rejo Zenger: I have specificaly selected and configured a number of key ID's for a mailinglist. This is a deliberate action, and if a key is not available there is no need to select an alternative. Keys are always So, actually, the current situation where mutt asks w

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-04 Thread Rejo Zenger
++ 03/04/15 18:44 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: I'm cleaning up and looking into committing the multiple crypt hook patch, but need some feedback from people who use it. The current behavior (without that patch) is to prompt whether to use the crypt-hook value if one is found. If the user answers

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-04 Thread Rejo Zenger
++ 04/04/15 09:28 +0200 - Heinz Diehl: On 04.04.2015, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: I'm cleaning up and looking into committing the multiple crypt hook patch, but need some feedback from people who use it. Where can I find the patch? See: - http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3727 - https://githu

Re: Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-04 Thread Heinz Diehl
On 04.04.2015, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote: > I'm cleaning up and looking into committing the multiple crypt hook > patch, but need some feedback from people who use it. Where can I find the patch?

Multiple crypt-hook behavior

2015-04-03 Thread Kevin J. McCarthy
I'm cleaning up and looking into committing the multiple crypt hook patch, but need some feedback from people who use it. The current behavior (without that patch) is to prompt whether to use the crypt-hook value if one is found. If the user answers "no" then Mutt will use the original address fo