Various design questions
Mon Oct 22 12:01:01 2001
George Staikos <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Saturday 20 October 2001 13:58, Bernhard Reiter wrote:
>> > I know that you have to make this compatible with Mutt, but do you =
>> > agree that things like key management should be integrated with the KDE
>> > crypto manager? I think it would be unfortunate for users to have to
>> > import their keys in two places and manage them twice.
>> The optimal solution would be that keys are held in one place
>> and can be accessed by several "front-ends".
>> GpgSM will be this part in the diagramm of
>> AFAIUI Gpgme will be the api which can be used by several programs
>> to control the keydatabase.
> The only real way to get this to work now is to have the KDE GUI searc=
> both key databases. We have to have our own. Not anyone will want to=20
> install this project but they may want to use SSL in Konqueror or code=20
> signing in Reaktivate. This also raises another question: When a user=
> imports a new key via the GUI, which database does it go into? The GPG o=
> or the KDE one? Or both? Or do we prompt the user? I guess by using th=
> md5 fingerprint it's easy to remove duplicates so that isn't a problem.=
> KMail should use the KDE key manager though, not the GPG one (but the KD=
> key database can of course merge at runtime with the GPG one). It would =
> terribly unfortunate for a user to import a key into the KDE database and=
> then not get to use it from within a KDE application.
IMHO there should be a command line interface (or dynamic library
ditto) to =C4gypten, and Kmail etc could use it, via the KDE key
manager. Then non-KDE stuff such as Gnome and other applications
(e.g., Emacs) could interface to the same database as well, without
the need of interfacing with a full-blown widget-specific GUI. It
would be unfortunate if all programs that need security has to require
KDE, especially considering text-only apps such as Mutt.