On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 01:13:39PM +0200, Stephan Seitz wrote: > On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:18:17PM -0400, Derek Martin wrote: > >I /was/ going to say this: > > > > As a matter of fact, I ONLY use PGP-MIME on this list. If you can > > find my posts on other lists, you'll see that I use traditional > > PGP, for precisely that reason. > > *Sigh* This will help spreading software which can handle PGP/MIME very > much. ;-( I live in the real world, where I must be able to communicate and work with real people. It is not my job to prod people into using software that they obviously don't want to use, whether I think it's better or not. It IS my job to be able to communicate effectively with a diverse group of people, no matter what software they are using. For that reason I have always, and will always, fight against changes that deprecate or degrade older standards that are still in common usage. Despite newer standards, Traditional PGP is still a standard, and it should remain supported. > Why do people always chose to work around bugs for others, so that > programmers of broken software don’t have to fix them? > I mean, this is not a temporary workaround. It's not a bug, and it's not a work-around. It's legitimate, standard, and common functionality. -- 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:
pgpfP0W8P0ILl.pgp
Description: PGP signature