Rejo Zenger wrote: > ++ 31/03/15 11:47 -0700 - Kevin J. McCarthy: > >I've been working on this patch series for a while, and finally > >committed it to the repository yesterday. For those of you who would > >like to "encrypt by default" and don't mind compiling from the > >repository, please check it out. > > To get a copy of your code, I just need to clone the "default" branch from > the Mercurial repository?
Yes, it's in the default branch in the Mercurial repository. > I haven't had a look at the code yet, but can you explain how it does work > (e.g. how does it determine when there's a key for a recipient on the > keyring and encrypting is feasable and when it is not)? It uses the same routines that Mutt uses when you go to send a message, but it takes away any prompting. It looks for an email-address match (or crypt-hook with a key) for each recipient. If all recipients have a key, it enables encryption. Otherwise it disables encryption. This happens whenever the To, Cc, or Bcc list is edited, or when the message is edited if $edit_headers is set. A word of caution though, this patch series significantly changed the code that ticket 3727 applies to, so I doubt that patch will apply without some re-working. > Additionaly, may I draw your attention to these two tickets: > > - <http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3727>, which is patch to allow for > encryption to multiple keys based on a single recipient (which is usefull > when sending encrypted mail to mailinglist with a static set of > subscribers) > > - <http://dev.mutt.org/trac/ticket/3728>, which is a bugreport for a > case in which users are not able to read application/pgp-encrypted > attachments (unless the user saves the attachments and runs gpg and > openssl manually on the saved message part) Thanks for opening the tickets. I can't guarantee a timeline, but I'll put those on my radar to look at. -Kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
