GNOME.org
 

Re: [Evolution] how many people actually use pgp over gpg, and why?

On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 00:16, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:

On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 01:56, Ralph Sanford wrote:

On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 21:15, Michael Leone wrote:

On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 09:31, Michael Rothwell wrote:

On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 20:04, Jeffrey Stedfast wrote:

I have just recently rewritten support for gnupg using the --status-fd
[...]
Evolution 1.1.x. I would also like to know why you won't use gnupg.


I don't know anyone who uses PGP anymore. Even people using crypto on
Windows are using gpg these days, in my limited experience. Plus, GPG is
free, portable, and available, whereas PGP is not free and has been 'end
of lifed,' so to speak.


Then you should get out and meet more people. :-)

I use PGP when on Windows, since there are no decent GPG plugins for my
MUA (Pegasus). And I know of at least 2 others who use PGP on Windows.
There's also no decent GUI for GPG on Windows, and most Windows users
wouldn't know a command line if it bit them. :-)



Have to agree with Michael on the use of PGP in windows.  An end-user or
consumer type person using windows may use PGP, but is extremely
unlikely to use GPG or have even heard of GPG.

In order to use evolution to communicate quickly and efficiently with
computer users (still more likely to be windows users), evolution and
GPG needs to be compatible with people who use email clients ranging
from outlook express, outlook, through to eudora, pegasus and pmmail. 
Communicating with persons using evolution/GPG on linux is an extremely
small percentage of the world of computer users.


You're missing the point completely. You do not need to use PGP in
Evolution to be compatable with people using other clients with PGP, GPG
is PGP compatable and thus my question boils down to:

Is there any reason to allow LINUX users to use pgp 5.0 or pgp 6.5.8
when they have gpg as a valid option (that is probably better in every
way shape and form including support, since, well, pgp has none).



Rather than any effort being made to rationalize any reduction in
compatibility between linux/evolution/GPG and the rest of world using
PGP, I would far prefer that ability of evolution users to communicate
with windows email clients be enhanced.  Such as the ability to
seamlessly send encrypted attachments to the above named email clients. 
BTW, we are not actually communicating with them if they can not open
the encrypted attachments seamlessly as well.  

I do not really want to get into a debate about the benefits of GPG vs
PGP or PGP in line quoting vs RFC compliance.  I just want to be able to
use evolution to communicate seamlessly with the greatest number of
other email users.



Surf on over to http://bugzilla.ximian.com, assign bugs 17540 and 17541
to yourself and get hackin' ;-)


You also realise that Microsoft didn't write the PGP code used by
Outlook, NAI did. And NAI is no longer supporting that stuff :-)

The way I see it, that means we don't have to either.

Jeff



Since the message subject is and remains: "how many people actually use
pgp over gpg, and why?"   I do not feel that have completely missed any
point.

How many people actually use pgp?  In my experience virtually all
windows users that are using public key encryption are using pgp,
because it is easier for them to use than GPG.  I believe that this is
the point that Michael Leone was also trying to make.  Your experience
may be different but that does not make my experiences less valid and
does not mean that I have missed the point.

I never said that anyone needed to use pgp in evolution to be compatible
with other email clients or for any other reason.  With regard to your
new question of allowing linux user to use pgp in evolution, that is
really a question of convenience to existing pgp users vs the ability of
ximian to program evolution to work as efficiently as possible.  I would
suggest that every encrypted mail user from windows that tries linux
will initially start with pgp as their keys are pre-existing and pgp
will be more familiar to them.  In the general computer world and even
among linux users with limited experience, my experience remains that
pgp is more common.  Not trying to suggest that there are not valid
reasons to switch to gpg, but stating that in my experience the pgp
users even in linux outnumber the gpg users.

Regarding the bugzilla comments, you definitely have me confused with
someone else.  My last programming effort was 30 years ago and I will
not change that with your challenge.  To me computers are a tool.  I try
and help by getting involved in the occasional beta project and offering
comments from an enduser point of view.  Beyond that, I have too many
other items requiring my attention and limited resources.

NAI may have dropped support, but as someone who used the freeware
version and encouraged new users to use the freeware version, I do not
know of anyone who ever noticed that NAI was supporting pgp.  My
comments about compatibility with pgp in windows email clients had
nothing to do with NAI.  My concern with compatibility with windows
based pgp is only related to communicating with existing pgp users that
are stuck in a windows world.  I remain firmly convinced that the number
of encrypted mail users using windows based pgp is FAR greater than the
number of evolution based encrypted mail users.   Just because NAI is
not supporting pgp does not mean that pgp has ceased to work.  Assuming
that evolution is attempting to be a communications tool, then in order
to communicate with the greatest number of people I would argue that
evolution should be compatible with the existing users.  


-- 
Ralph Sanford       -       If your government does not trust you,
rsanford telusplanet net   -   should you trust your government?

DH/DSS Key   -   0x7A1BEA01
[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]