bernhard at intevation.de
Tue Mar 22 09:56:28 CET 2016
On Monday 21 March 2016 at 16:49:41, Dashamir Hoxha wrote:
> Hi Bernhard, thanks for having a look at it.
you are welcome! I appreciate all efforts to make GnuPG more accessible,
this is why I am taking a little bit of time to write up some feedback.
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 3:05 PM, Bernhard Reiter <bernhard at intevation.de>
> > Most of these commands are not much easier than the direct gpg2
> > commands they are aiming to replace.
> Yes, but the overall number of commands and options supported
> is 10 times smaller than those of gpg2. Tutorials about egpg are also
> much shorter.
Just like Peter wrote I think that a user would usually not
encounter all bells and wistles. You can get along with just a few
commands. This is why I suggest of trying to approach this from
the documentation angle and for the remaining options that are still too hard:
Suggest improvements directly to gpg2.
> And the default values of the options are more suitable
> for a beginner (at least in my opinion).
Just like Peter I do not fully understand the rationale behind those
choices and would probably choose different ones.
A good path forward would be to try to measure this with
groups of users in a usability test. This is a lot of effort I guess,
so instead we could try to develop a few personas (example user types)
and try to argu from their point of view.
> > * shell scripts will not work on plattforms without a shell
> > (e.g. Windows)
> I have heard that you can use shell scripts on Windows (with cygwin).
Using Cygwin is not a good approach because it is lik a second operating
system within windows. Windows users would prefer a more windows like
> > Ideas for improvements:
> > * I you must, write wrappers code it in something more plattform
> > indepentent,
> > e.g. in python3 (using pyme or pygpgme where appropriate)
> The problem with Python is that I am not familar with it (and there may be
> other problems too, that I don't know).
> But if you could fork egpg and re-implement it in Python, it could be
Any cross plattform approach would work. Python has the advantage
that the source code can be changed by an editor an immedeately run
and that it works fairly well cross-plattform.
What is even more important is that you should use the official API to
GnuPG which is Gpgme. https://wiki.gnupg.org/APIs
> > * Suggest and improve the original gpg2 command line interface, so that
> > usage is easier and the more esotheric options will not be seen or used
> > by default.
> > * Write a beginners man page for the original gpg2, which covers only the
> > main
> > use cases.
> I guess these two are suggestions for EasyGpg2016.
The goals of out EasyGpg206 are different: We will add some new trust and cert
distribution methods to GnuPG and some selected email applications. Users
shall never needs to go to the command line.
www.intevation.de/~bernhard (CEO) www.fsfe.org (Founding GA Member)
Intevation GmbH, Osnabrück, Germany; Amtsgericht Osnabrück, HRB 18998
Owned and run by Frank Koormann, Bernhard Reiter, Dr. Jan-Oliver Wagner
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
More information about the Gnupg-users