On Sat, Aug 07, 2004 at 01:44:34PM +0200, Adeodato Simó wrote:
> I object to the inclusion of this patch as-is, detailed rationale
> follows:
>
> - I strongly object to changing the default shorcut to wipe crypt
> options from (f)orget to (c)lear. The latter is probably more
> appropriate, but I know for sure that the "pfy" keystroke sequence
> is hard-coded in many mutt users' fingers. *Please* don't break
> that.
Well... I'm not (completely) inflexible, but...
This rationale is not rational. It will take users a week or two at
most to adjust (I know, because I had to adjust myself when I wrote
the patch originally). If it really is better, and you seem to agree
that it is, then it should be changed regardless. The habits of users
should not be allowed to be a barrier to genuine improvement.
Allowing them to be is akin to Microsoft keeping brokenness in their
software in the name of backward compatibility... The great thing
about humans is that we ARE adaptable -- there is no such thing as
hard-wired behavior.
If we make this change now, after a short time the old hats will
adjust, and in the mean time, no harm will be done -- when they hit
(f) mutt will just beep inoccuously. Meanwhile, the new users will
have the benefit of a more intuitive and succinct interface. I see
that as a win, even with user adjustment issues. The code changes all
the time... someone's habits are invariably affected. This is only
one more case of the same old story...
Here is a complete but brief summary [relatively speaking, taking into
account the author ;-)] of the argument in favor of the change:
1. "forget it" is yucky. I can't quite come up with an adequate word
to describe my objection to it. Words such as unprofessional,
tacky, unaesthetic, and ugly come to mind; but I don't think any
of them are quite accurate.
2. "forget it" is ambiguous, as has been mentioned in the bug reports.
3. When this function is used, the encryption status becomes
"Clear." Changing the name of the option to (c)lear reflects
this exactly and perfectly.
4. The word "clear" also reflects that the message is sent as
cleartext, or "in the clear" -- also perfectly reflecting the
nature of the content. Nothing could be more intuitive.
As the robot said, "My logic is undenyable." ;-)
> - While the "msg->security = XXX" is ok for (e)ncrypt and (s)ign, I
> don't think it's appropriate for sign (a)s or encrypt (w)ith. The
> patch leaves the sign (a)s stuff right (i.e., untouched), but leaves
> the encrypt (w)ith thing in an inconsistent state (it's not then
> possible to do "bw" and choose key, one has to add (s)ign again
> later).
Well, as I said, I couldn't test this stuff, and I'm not familiar with
S/MIME, so I'll defer here. :)
> I then propose the attached patch for inclusion in mutt CVS. I ask:
>
> - Derek to consider it as a compromise between no-change and his
> full patch, and to say if he agrees.
As a practical matter I'd take this over no change, but from a
philisophical standpoint I can't really approve. But, I also can't
allow my philosophy to get in the way of a genuine improvement, even
if it is only partial improvement. If that's what it takes to get the
change in then so be it; but I will still note my objection.
--
Derek D. Martin http://www.pizzashack.org/ GPG Key ID: 0xDFBEAD02
-=-=-=-=-
This message is posted from an invalid address. Replying to it will result in
undeliverable mail. Sorry for the inconvenience. Thank the spammers.
Attachment:
pgpYWM4JfT8Th.pgp
Description: PGP signature