-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 09/19/2017 04:03:15 PM Tue, Albrecht Dreß wrote:
Hi Peter:
Am 19.09.17 00:26 schrieb(en) Peter Bloomfield:
…
Of these, (1) seems reasonable. (2) might be better implemented as a separate
option like '--with-password-manager = libsecret | gnome-keyring | internal'
(Balsa does have its own private config file for passwords), as there is no
apparent reason for tying it to the content of the .desktop files.
I think this would be a good idea! But now that you are clearing up - why
should we keep the gnome-keyring option at all? I.e. “--with-libsecret” does
exactly this, whereas “--without-libsecret” uses Balsa's internal method (which
might be improved; e.g. by encrypting the password cache with the GnuPG or
S/MIME public key when gpgme is available. This might be a project for the
future, though).
OK--yes, I see that libsecret is available even in Ubuntu trusty, so I guess
there's no longer any need to keep gnome-keyring.
But (3) baffles me: GSettings is part of libgio, which is always used by Balsa. It
does require a backend, but is there any setup where none is provided? If there is,
we should have another option like '--enable-gsettings = yes | no", but I see
no reason for tying it to --with-gnome.
I fully agree with you that GSettings should not be linked to Gnome. As we
always require GIO, I would suggest to always use it, without any configure
option.
OK, will do.
Thanks for the thoughts!
Peter
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iF0EARECAB0WIQS030wPRfNNA5alz3MfX9S1uSp09QUCWcGKKQAKCRAfX9S1uSp0
9YyjAJ9vUAZxcwEY5T9U1yIu97mlpOLT/ACgnnF08cRsi4+IMjADWXm0T1lEw/4=
=P0/N
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
balsa-list mailing list
balsa-list@gnome.org
https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/balsa-list
