[pmmail-list] sick of 2.20.2030 - where are the real important features?

[Lueko Willms]

On Sun, 21 Jan 2001 12:36:47 +0100, Stefan Kirch wrote:


1. On encrypting as standard procedure or configuring it in the
address book: 

> On Sat, 20 Jan 2001 19:49:20 -0800 (PST), Kris Sorem Sr wrote:
> 
> >>* Setting for an address-book-entry to
> >>   - encrypt an email to this recipient by default
> >
> >There are some users who would argue that if you are 
>> encrypting messages you should do it all the time.
> 
> Do you have a pgp-key for EVERY recipient? I would prefer to encrypt
> avery message, but there are a lot of persons, that don't have
> a pgp-key, e.g. they use smime or nothing in that way.
> So, if you set "Encrypt every message" you got most time an error
> message. I would like to set "Encrypt every message, if possible",
> i.e. if I have a pgp-key. 

  I don't see an option to "Encrypt every message". But, I have to
admit, that I did not yet use the built-in PGP functionality of
PMMail, neither on OS/2 nor on Windows. 

> 
> BTW: I don't think, that this is a feature, hard to implement. Only
> simulate a mouse-click, and I know a lot of pmmail-users, who also
> prefer this option. 

   I'm not sure of you want to say, and I guess English is not your
primary language. 

   Anyway, it is not too difficult to implement a scenario where
every e-mail is encrypted when a key for the recipient is found in
the PGP key ring. I wrote such a software to be used as a Send Exit
some years ago. The original PMMail developers know PGPREXX, and
other old-time OS/2 PMMail users probably, too. 

    As to the address book -- in the Windows (Pro) version, I see for
every entry in the address book a page with security information. In
my address book, this is always empty. But isn't this the place where
the wishes of Stefan Kirch are already implemented? 


2. Relational table Address-book-entry/Signature

> 
> >>   - sign an email to this recipient by default
> >>   - use signature xyz for this recipient by default
> >
> Don't you have a "personal" and a "official" signature? Isn't it 
> precarious to send a business contact "Hugs ..." ?!?

   I think it would be a nice to have thing. 


3. Fetching only from configured POP3-Servers

> 
> >>* Possiblity to exclude an account of "Fetch all"
> >
> >Then it wouldn't be "Fetch all" - would it? It would be fetch some.
> >Explain the significant benefit gained in fetching only some accounts
> >since it will most likely increase program response time.
> 
> Strange reply. I'm really confused about the way, you reply to
> my email.
> Isn't it imaginable, that you have some accounts only for sending
> email (e.g. as postmaster of a server or something like that) and
> you don't have a pop-acount for? Wouldn't it be more clever
> to fetach only these acount's where there are settings for
> pop-user and server?!?

   This is something else than what I understood from your previous
e-mail with your suggestions. 

   I think it should be obvious not to try and fetch messages for an
account which doesnt have a POP3-server configured. 

   But your previous mail made me believe that you want to have a
"fetch some" key between the ALT-F2 and F2 for a single account. This
would not make sense to me. You can as well hit the F2 key for all
those accounts you want to fetch mail for instead of first stepping
thru all accounts, selecting those to be fetched, and then hitting
one key to start these actions. 
   

Lüko Willms 
Frankfurt/Main 
/ Lueko.Willms@T-Online.de 

- pmmail-list - The PMMail Dicussion List ---------------------------
To POST to the list, send your message to
pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com

To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message to mdaemon@bmtmicro.com with the first 
line of the message body being...

UNSUBSCRIBE pmmail-list@blueprintsoftwareworks.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------