No GnuPG library for now
ftobin at uiuc.edu
Thu Oct 19 19:39:37 CEST 2000
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Greg KH, at 13:46 -0700 on Thu, 19 Oct 2000, wrote:
> > This is exactly the approach that software engineering courses and books
> > teach against (unless you are doing XP, of course, which GnuPG doesn't
> > seem to be doing).
> And yet you are saying this is a bad thing?
> I don't understand.
I'm saying that, for larger projects, software engineering teaches that
design is supposed to encompass the large majority of the development
(unless doing XP, of course, again, which GnuPG is not, or else there
wouldn't be a heavy need for auditing).
The original message by Taral stated a desire for creating something to
process/system diagrams for how GnuPG works, and implementing in in a
clean, modularized way. Werner stated:
That is a lot of work and I prefer to invest the time in auditing and
making the code cleaner.
This seems like refactoring the code a lot, but it doesn't scale well, or
generally take into account the needs for third-parties to interact with
> I fully support the goal of auditing the code and making it cleaner
> over making a library, even though my job would be made _so_ much
> easier if there was a gnupg library (see
> http://www.immunix.org/cryptomark.html for more info.)
The desire being scrutinzed isn't just to make it a library, but to
develop GnuPG into a modularized system, well with-defined interfaces, and
connetions between those interfaces.
Frank Tobin http://www.uiuc.edu/~ftobin/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (FreeBSD)
Comment: pgpenvelope 2.9.0 - http://pgpenvelope.sourceforge.net/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the Gnupg-devel