Bug list update, 02.12.2002

[David Shaw]

On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 06:04:22PM +0100, Miguel Coca wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 11:46:35 -0500, David Shaw wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 03, 2002 at 05:33:45PM +0100, Miguel Coca wrote:
> > > We shouldn't encourage users to change the expiration date of their keys
> > > (unless maybe in advanced mode). The "expire" command in --edit-key only
> > > changes the primary key, not any encryption subkeys you may have.
> > 
> > You can change the expiration of subkeys if you do "key n", (where
> > n==the subkey number) before you do "expire".
> 
> Yes, we talked about that back in August. It was decided that changing the
> expiration date of a subkey didn't have much sense, as you can always
> generate another subkey (you can check the archives for details).

Oops.. right!  Fingers faster than the memory sometimes.

> Also, I'd like to know something. Can we trust that the subkeys are listed
> in the same order in a key listing and in the edit menu. It doesn't happen
> with user ID's (which will eventually be a problem, as soon as we want to
> add a way to manage user ID's).

Yes, you can.  Subkeys are not sorted in either display.  Currently,
the user IDs are sorted in the --list-keys output to put the primary
user ID first, and any photo IDs last.  The edit menu shows the IDs in
their natural unsorted order on the key.

How soon will this become a problem?

David

-- 
   David Shaw  |  dshaw@jabberwocky.com  |  WWW http://www.jabberwocky.com/
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
   "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX.
      We don't believe this to be a coincidence." - Jeremy S. Anderson