In days of yore (Sat, 20 Apr 2024), Steffen Nurpmeso thus quoth:
> Kurt Hackenberg wrote in
> |Agreed.
>
> I do not, actually. Especially since it already is actively used.
> The question always is "how do receivers act upon this", of
> course, and this especially means the graphical, even
>
Hi Steffen,
On Sun, Apr 21, 2024 at 01:01:54AM +0200, Steffen Nurpmeso wrote:
> Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
> <20240420191646.ZD-tN3eo@steffen%sdaoden.eu>:
> |Kurt Hackenberg wrote in
> | :
> ||I would like to hold off on this until the draft becomes an RFC, if \
> ||it does.
> | --End of
>
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20240420230154.HauOMF4V@steffen%sdaoden.eu>:
...
|But i thing we refer to different drafts now. I think you are all
|talking about draft-autocrypt-lamps-protected-headers-02, whereas
...
And i want to reiterate that i myself dislike autocrypt as yet one
another
Steffen Nurpmeso wrote in
<20240420191646.ZD-tN3eo@steffen%sdaoden.eu>:
|Kurt Hackenberg wrote in
| :
||On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 03:41:40PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
||>On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 09:05:23AM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:
||>> It's odd to me that, since OpenPGP and S/MIME both
Kurt Hackenberg wrote in
:
|On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 03:41:40PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote:
|>On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 09:05:23AM -0700, Will Yardley wrote:
|>> It's odd to me that, since OpenPGP and S/MIME both support MIME
|>> encapsulation that the draft standard wouldn't use a separate MIME
Hi,
I only had a brief look into this thread but stumbled upon this:
> *7: BCCs should be hidden recipients.
[BCCs shold be separate mails of course.]
Using a hidden recipient is a major hassle for everyone with more than a
single key and in particular when several smartcards. As a BCC
Hi Werner,
On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 02:10:28PM +0200, Werner Koch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I only had a brief look into this thread but stumbled upon this:
>
> > *7: BCCs should be hidden recipients.
>
> [BCCs shold be separate mails of course.]
>
> Using a hidden recipient is a major hassle for
Hi Kevin,
On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 11:39:17AM +0800, Kevin J. McCarthy wrote:
> What I did do was a minimal implementation of the spec at the time, so that
> Mutt could read messages from other clients that started sending with a
> hidden Subject header, for interoperability.
>
> Writing was not
