Hi Robert,
Thank you for the story, it seems funny, i wish im at that channel as
well, as I used to be on irc almost everyday at that time. Well, I am
using Evolution for the fact that I feel that evolution is much faster
than thunderbird, well, in my machine? 
I just used evo since last
week, and im still trying to get hold of it. Way back in my windows
machine, I used thunderbird alot and been my favorite mail client.
So, are you using Thunderbird? windows?
I also I want to know your usage of PGP.. are you using it alot? because
my problem is, most of my friend and recipient doesnt know how to use
PGP.
Once again, I would like to thank you for taking your time telling me
story about evo and pgp engineers, it worth reading it. Really
appreciate it a lot.
-Noel
On Tue, 2006-10-17 at 04:02 -0500, Robert J. Hansen wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> Noel Lee wrote:
> > the pub and secret are the same? i have no pub key of other
>; imported.
>
> They're not the same. However, they do have the same identifier, yes.
>
> When you typed those two commands, you saw four different key
> listings,
> but only two different identifiers for them. That's because the public
> and private parts of an asymmetric keypair use the same identifier.
>
> For instance, my key 0xFEAF8109 has a public part and a private part.
>; Both are labeled 0xFEAF8109.
>
> > You're right, Evolution support for GnuPG is very poor, I cant get
> > message to be encrypted, unlike in Thunderbird with enigmail.
>
> Jump in the Wayback Machine to spring of 2000. PGP was still owned by
> Network Associates and Evolution was just beginning to have GnuPG
>; support.
>
> One of the PGP/Network Associates engineers--one of the guys
> responsible
> for trying to port PGP 7.x to UNIX--was doing interoperability testing
> with Evolution and discovered Evolution was doing a few things wrong.
> Namely, it had no support for inline OpenPGP (the way this message
> here
> is signed, for instance), and would only support PGP/MIME.
>
> This was a problem for many reasons. PGP/MIME has never been
> well-supported by email clients. Many mailing lists strip off
> attachments. The number of inline OpenPGP users outnumbers PGP/MIME
> users by at least a factor of ten. For these and many more reasons, it
> was important that Evolution support inline OpenPGP.
>
> This engineer popped on IRC and found the guy who was writing--who is
> still writing--most of Evolution's crypto support. (In the interests
> of
> not embarrassing him, he'll go nameless.) The engineer explained to
> the
> Evolution geek what the problem was and why it needed to be fixed, and
> even ways it could be fixed.
>
> The Evolution geek was adamant there was no problem at all. He said
> RFC3156 was the "definitive"; standard for email encryption and for
> that
> reason he wasn't going to waste a minute of time on inline PGP
> support.
>
> As the engineer explained things in more detail, the Evolution geek
> got
> increasingly angry, finally exploding and saying that whoever the
> other
>; guy was, he certainly didn't know anything about cryptography or the
> OpenPGP standard and he should try implementing it sometime!
>
> Then he looked up the engineer's IP address and domain and saw it
> resolved to PGP.com. Other people noticed it, too, and there was much
> laughter directed at the Evolution geek. The Evolution geek's response
> was to boot-and-ban the PGP engineer from the IRC channel.
>
> It lasted all of about five minutes, before Ettore Perazzoli--a name I
> only mention because (a) he's dead, and (b) he was professional and
> courteous the entire time--brought the PGP engineer back and removed
> the
> Evolution geek's channel moderator privileges. The PGP engineer and
> Ettore talked at length for a while about how to change Evolution to
> support inline PGP.
>
> (If you're wondering how I know all this, I was in the IRC channel
> while
>; it was happening. It was half comedy, half tragedy.)
>
> Six years later, Evolution _still_ has no support for inline PGP.
>
> I am not very impressed with the people who have written Evolution's
> crypto support, and I am not impressed with the fact that even after
>; six
> years a major bug has not been addressed.
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJFNJw/AAoJELcA9IL+r4EJu9oIAKW/uHBM8BfcLYFLllGfi39B
> xrFD04KzXE2+NIH76uCRnu0AwkzuvU/arSQ52zAjWru28Qak22TjeUqMHdr4WTt2
> 1+Fv3aJaWMXkkN6weKfADlrwmUIX7dC2ROz/UsnYH0ad+;2uEWeZ5xi4oC6X1RL8n
> T0JVm0vg5Od7Z/vJYFWKCv4JRIEyzL/AX4fcIGGevsf0EWXT3;7MLjeGPIysswrHo
> VOrS7DHiaMJCQE8O6gmTBY4p9exnD1Xw2iwVoq3;r5HpooTSYD5eZXE8Wxl8kyzEe
>; KmjvOOr24tIUX9+OpuKWVYyxv/dngJEoMY9ehsW9TkoZbDrtTxopBAg77ogqZrw=
> =zg4C
>; -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
.