Hi Dashamir, On Monday 21 March 2016 at 16:49:41, Dashamir Hoxha wrote: > Hi Bernhard, thanks for having a look at it.
you are welcome! I appreciate all efforts to make GnuPG more accessible, this is why I am taking a little bit of time to write up some feedback. > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Bernhard Reiter <[email protected]> > > Most of these commands are not much easier than the direct gpg2 > > commands they are aiming to replace. > > Yes, but the overall number of commands and options supported > is 10 times smaller than those of gpg2. Tutorials about egpg are also > much shorter. Just like Peter wrote I think that a user would usually not encounter all bells and wistles. You can get along with just a few commands. This is why I suggest of trying to approach this from the documentation angle and for the remaining options that are still too hard: Suggest improvements directly to gpg2. > And the default values of the options are more suitable > for a beginner (at least in my opinion). Just like Peter I do not fully understand the rationale behind those choices and would probably choose different ones. A good path forward would be to try to measure this with groups of users in a usability test. This is a lot of effort I guess, so instead we could try to develop a few personas (example user types) and try to argu from their point of view. > > * shell scripts will not work on plattforms without a shell > > (e.g. Windows) > > I have heard that you can use shell scripts on Windows (with cygwin). Using Cygwin is not a good approach because it is lik a second operating system within windows. Windows users would prefer a more windows like approach. > > Ideas for improvements: > > * I you must, write wrappers code it in something more plattform > > indepentent, > > e.g. in python3 (using pyme or pygpgme where appropriate) > > The problem with Python is that I am not familar with it (and there may be > other problems too, that I don't know). > But if you could fork egpg and re-implement it in Python, it could be > great. Any cross plattform approach would work. Python has the advantage that the source code can be changed by an editor an immedeately run and that it works fairly well cross-plattform. What is even more important is that you should use the official API to GnuPG which is Gpgme. https://wiki.gnupg.org/APIs > > * Suggest and improve the original gpg2 command line interface, so that > > usage is easier and the more esotheric options will not be seen or used > > by default. > > * Write a beginners man page for the original gpg2, which covers only the > > main > > use cases. > > I guess these two are suggestions for EasyGpg2016. The goals of out EasyGpg206 are different: We will add some new trust and cert distribution methods to GnuPG and some selected email applications. Users shall never needs to go to the command line. Best, Bernhard -- www.intevation.de/~bernhard (CEO) www.fsfe.org (Founding GA Member) Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, Germany; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998 Owned and run by Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
