On 09/16/15 16:13, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On Tue 2015-09-15 12:38:32 -0400, Robert J. Hansen wrote: >> There's some work underway to regularize the language used by OpenPGP >> applications. As Gus said at Circumvention, "Untrusted Good Signature >> just sucks." > > :) > >> I'd much rather we waited to see if anything comes of this language >> regularization attempt before we changed the Enigmail language. If we >> make a change, and then a few months later change it again to comply >> with the regularization, I think that would confuse a lot of people. > > Alternately, we *know* that the existing language confuses a lot of > people, and enigmail has an opportunity to drive the language > regularization process by using a reasonable, clean vocabulary itself. > > I don't think that any enigmail development should wait on results -- > enigmail should help make the results happen.
While your point is in general valid, I suggest that if you KNOW something is in flux and do not know yet what its final form will be, it is prudent to wait until you know what it's going to look like before you rewrite code against it. Rewriting the same body of code twice doubles the number of opportunities to introduce bugs. -- Phil Stracchino Babylon Communications [email protected] [email protected] Landline: 603.293.8485
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ enigmail-users mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or make changes to your subscription click here: https://admin.hostpoint.ch/mailman/listinfo/enigmail-users_enigmail.net
