[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: epg.el: epg--status-GET_LINE not working?

From: Neal H. Walfield
Subject: Re: epg.el: epg--status-GET_LINE not working?
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2017 21:37:41 +0200
User-agent: Wanderlust/2.15.9 (Almost Unreal) SEMI-EPG/1.14.7 (Harue) FLIM/1.14.9 (Goj┼Ź) APEL/10.8 EasyPG/1.0.0 Emacs/24.5 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MULE/6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO)

At Mon, 26 Jun 2017 09:30:00 +0200,
Daiki Ueno wrote:
> Teemu Likonen <address@hidden> writes:
> > I have been thinking of fixing epg.el bug #24350
> > <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=24350>.
> I had a tentative patch for this, but I decided not to include it.
> At that time, the GnuPG developers didn't seem to have a consensus on
> how TOFU is supposed to work:

FWIW, the TOFU modus operandi are unlikely to change at this stage and
have been stable for nearly a year.

> Neal suggested it should be triggered by a
> key, while Werner suggested that it should be triggered by an email
> address.
> I am on Werner's side, and if the things are implemented in that way, we
> don't need to handle the conflicts in such lower level (but in the MUA
> level).

My recollection is that you said: if a recipient is specified by key
id rather than by email address (e.g., gpg is called like: 'gpg -e -r
KEYID') and the key has a conflict, the conflict should be ignored.
You justified this based on the observation that the caller knows what
is going on.

1. I disagree that this is the right behavior.

2. AFAIK, there is no precedence for this behavior in gpg.  Consider
an expired or revoked key: if you try to use it, gpg will error out
with "unusable public key."

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]