paolo.bolzoni.brown at gmail.com
Tue Mar 22 10:54:18 CET 2016
I totally agree, Dashamir I really think you should focus on what you
think is hard in gnupg? And why?
Are you sure a new program (and not a simple patch) is the best answer?
At the moment you are showing us strange defaults, an implementation
that can break at any time, and I am not really sure how much it is
For example, I find strange and needlessy difficult that the keys have
a duration and not an expiration date. So when one wants the key to
last until the end of the year or to his birthday one has to make a
date difference manually.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Robert J. Hansen <rjh at sixdemonbag.org> wrote:
>> Just like Peter wrote I think that a user would usually not
>> encounter all bells and wistles.
> I think it's rather a bit more extreme than that. I think if a user has
> to fire GnuPG up from the command line *for anything*, something's gone
> terribly wrong and we're in danger of losing a user.
> No, no, I'm not saying GnuPG is bad for being a command-line
> application. But ask yourself how many users even know how to launch a
> terminal, much less interact with one. The number is shockingly low.
> If you want to improve GnuPG's adoption rate, the best path forward
> appears to be to target users who only know how to navigate GUI interfaces.
> I don't think the EasyGnuPG authors have thought through their target
> market. It targets users who are comfortable enough to say "oh, I
> should use the terminal for this!", but not comfortable enough to read a
> manpage. It's targeting a small subset of a small subset.
> Gnupg-users mailing list
> Gnupg-users at gnupg.org
More information about the Gnupg-users