Bug list update, 02.12.2002

[Miguel Coca]

--v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 16:58:07 +0100, Markus Gerwinski wrote:
> Miguel Coca wrote:
> > In that case, the correct behaviour would be to make the other key the
> > default one.
>=20
> I think, even then the user should be warned. And if there were more than=
 two
> secret keys before, which one shall be the next default key then?

Ok, we can add a dialog that says something like "The default key was
deleted, key XXXXXXXX will be the default now [OK]".

> > > ... I see. So, a key is looked upon as valid, if
> > >  - it's signed by someone I've got at least "full" ownertrust to or
> > Yes, but that signing key must be valid too.
>=20
> So it must be signed itself with a key I trust? (E.g. my own one?)

Yes.

> > Also, three marginally trusted keys can validate a key, too.
>=20
> You mean, three keys definitely belonging to owners I marginally trust?

Right.

> (Maybe in the long run, we should add kind of a graphical visualization of
> the web of trust to GPA...)

That would be *really* cool. However, it should be restricted to a single
key (there are tools to graph the web of trust of an entire keyring, but
they take *forever* to draw a graph that doesn't make that much sense).

Regards,
--=20
Miguel Coca                                         e970095@zipi.fi.upm.es
PGP Key 0x27FC3CA8                         http://zipi.fi.upm.es/~e970095/

--v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE9784TjE3Htif8PKgRAuD6AJ9A0pShbI3UbOisQSLp05wE9a75wgCfe3z7
NISfDj9CGrh8TrEepENV684=
=RduG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--v9Ux+11Zm5mwPlX6--