From kmail-devel Thu Feb 19 14:17:26 2004 From: Cornelius Schumacher Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2004 14:17:26 +0000 To: kmail-devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] composing html messages Message-Id: <200402191517.26845.schumacher () kde ! org> X-MARC-Message: https://marc.info/?l=kmail-devel&m=107720026232253 On Thursday 19 February 2004 14:49, Marc Mutz wrote: > On Thursday 19 February 2004 09:47, Cornelius Schumacher wrote: > > We agreed that the full merge of the aegypten branch is something for > > after the kdepim-3.3 release and that we would merge back stable > > features from the aegypten branch but not let the kdepim-3.3 release > > depend on this. So I would appreciate it very much if we could commit > > the HTML editing code as soon as possible and add the missing pieces > > like S/MIME support later. > > Actually, this is not (only) about S/MIME. It breaks OpenPGP/MIME just > as well. And I don't buy into a 'go ahead' from the /two/ persons on > kdepim that do _not_ use signatures :) You mean the patch breaks signing for non-HTML mails? From what I read from the mail I got the impression that we are only talking about HTML mails here. > Regarding inline signing: It does indeed not make much sense to add > support for inline signatures on html parts, and I'm not sure signing > of the plain text part is worth it. Just use OpenPGP/MIME (if this > patch wouldn't break it...). Could you please explain this a bit more to one of the two persons left not using signatures. Why doesn't it make sense to add support for inline signatures on html parts? Is what you call "inline signatures" the same what Don called "traditional GnuPG Signing/Encrpyting"? OpenPGP/MIME is something different, and it makes sense to use that to sign html mail, as well as S/MIME, right? Does KMail from KDE 3.2 already support this or is it something from the aegypten branch? -- Cornelius Schumacher _______________________________________________ KMail developers mailing list KMail-devel@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kmail-devel