2e/e053977c206df3100528446fe4a6307385b2e8

   1 Return-Path: <amdragon@mit.edu>\r
   2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
   3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
   4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
   5         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A057D429E25\r
   6         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:44:37 -0800 (PST)\r
   7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
   8 X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
   9 X-Spam-Score: -0.7\r
  10 X-Spam-Level: \r
  11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
  12         tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\r
  13 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
  14         by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
  15         with ESMTP id 05gPkxx31wfs for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
  16         Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:44:37 -0800 (PST)\r
  17 Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-7.MIT.EDU\r
  18         [18.7.68.36])\r
  19         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23DB2431FB6\r
  20         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:44:37 -0800 (PST)\r
  21 X-AuditID: 12074424-b7fae6d000000906-65-4ef54aa465aa\r
  22 Received: from mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.43])\r
  23         by dmz-mailsec-scanner-7.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP\r
  24         id 70.8C.02310.4AA45FE4; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 22:44:36 -0500 (EST)\r
  25 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103])\r
  26         by mailhub-auth-3.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id pBO3iaFf024142; \r
  27         Fri, 23 Dec 2011 22:44:36 -0500\r
  28 Received: from awakening.csail.mit.edu (awakening.csail.mit.edu [18.26.4.91])\r
  29         (authenticated bits=0)\r
  30         (User authenticated as amdragon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)\r
  31         by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id pBO3iZIj017672\r
  32         (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);\r
  33         Fri, 23 Dec 2011 22:44:36 -0500 (EST)\r
  34 Received: from amthrax by awakening.csail.mit.edu with local (Exim 4.77)\r
  35         (envelope-from <amdragon@mit.edu>)\r
  36         id 1ReIYC-0002FD-7W; Fri, 23 Dec 2011 22:45:36 -0500\r
  37 Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2011 22:45:36 -0500\r
  38 From: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>\r
  39 To: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>\r
  40 Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Introduce a generic tree-like abstraction for MIME\r
  41         traversal.\r
  42 Message-ID: <20111224034511.GB1927@mit.edu>\r
  43 References: <1323027100-10307-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>\r
  44         <1323460468-4030-1-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>\r
  45         <1323460468-4030-3-git-send-email-amdragon@mit.edu>\r
  46         <87k46572f7.fsf@gmail.com> <87mxb05dpt.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  47 MIME-Version: 1.0\r
  48 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
  49 Content-Disposition: inline\r
  50 In-Reply-To: <87mxb05dpt.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>\r
  51 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)\r
  52 X-Brightmail-Tracker:\r
  53  H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupileLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hTV1l3i9dXPYMNHLYurW/vZLfbs87K4\r
  54         fnMmswOzx93TXB47Z91l93i26hZzAHMUl01Kak5mWWqRvl0CV8bpMzPYC2ZzV0yY3srUwHiX\r
  55         o4uRk0NCwETi+etDLBC2mMSFe+vZQGwhgX2MEpdnh0HYGxgldt+P6WLkArJPMkk8b2xigXCW\r
  56         MEoc3NID1sEioCrRfPIa2CQ2AQ2JbfuXM4LYIgJmEj1f/oDZzAJeEhM+nWLqYuTgEBaIkHi6\r
  57         ow4kzCugLfGutZUdYuYXRol/q/cxQiQEJU7OfMIC0aslcePfS7BeZgFpieX/wB7gFDCV6Jhw\r
  58         HqxcVEBFYsrJbWwTGIVmIemehaR7FkL3AkbmVYyyKblVurmJmTnFqcm6xcmJeXmpRbrmermZ\r
  59         JXqpKaWbGEFBzu6isoOx+ZDSIUYBDkYlHt7GpV/8hFgTy4orcw8xSnIwKYnyXnX76ifEl5Sf\r
  60         UpmRWJwRX1Sak1p8iFGCg1lJhFczCaicNyWxsiq1KB8mJc3BoiTOq6H1zk9IID2xJDU7NbUg\r
  61         tQgmK8PBoSTB+8QTaKhgUWp6akVaZk4JQpqJgxNkOA/Q8CkgNbzFBYm5xZnpEPlTjIpS4rzb\r
  62         QBICIImM0jy4XlgSesUoDvSKMO9LkCoeYAKD634FNJgJaHCMEcjVxSWJCCmpBkbfo5v8c9I5\r
  63         /HS05kp/SZqfZ6Et9MxdJ4NVa7my1fUOgS2zuHiClTvff/ynFuB0Rc347Tahjsxbkj5zPK8/\r
  64         nu77KDdU4PnhII99rwMctu+suPhaoO3uXHcJhuak6+KXJ8t4tiYJzn/uFWLQa5hyLfhMpK45\r
  65         7/vS/x/OK6rky/wzEG/ecdGEV4mlOCPRUIu5qDgRAJ7o4DgdAwAA\r
  66 Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  67 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  68 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
  69 Precedence: list\r
  70 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
  71         <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
  72 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
  73         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
  74 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
  75 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
  76 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
  77 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
  78         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
  79 X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2011 03:44:37 -0000\r
  80 \r
  81 Quoth Jameson Graef Rollins on Dec 10 at  1:17 pm:\r
  82 > On Sat, 10 Dec 2011 03:25:48 +0400, Dmitry Kurochkin <dmitry.kurochkin@gmail.com> wrote:\r
  83 > > +           out->is_encrypted = TRUE;\r
  84 > > +           out->is_signed = TRUE;\r
  85 > > \r
  86 > > These are set only if we do decryption/verification.  But their\r
  87 > > names and comments imply that they should reflect properties of\r
  88 > > the part and be set independently from whether we are actually\r
  89 > > doing decryption or verification.\r
  90 > \r
  91 > I don't think this directly affects anything at the moment, but this is\r
  92 > a good point.  I can imagine that it might be good to maintain that\r
  93 > distinction down the line so it's probably worth being consistent here.\r
  94 \r
  95 See my response to Dmitry's original email.  The structural properties\r
  96 can be derived directly from the type of the part field, so I got rid\r
  97 of these fields.\r
  98 \r
  99 > > Both decryption and verification use cryptoctx.  But decryption\r
 100 > > is done iff decrypt is true (without checking if cryptoctx is\r
 101 > > set) and verification is done iff cryptoctx is set (without any\r
 102 > > special flag).  Why is it asymmetric?  Do we need to check if\r
 103 > > cryptoctx is set for decryption?\r
 104 > \r
 105 > We probably should.  We can probably fix this in followup patches, since\r
 106 >  Austin is just working off of what dkg and I put in there originally.\r
 107 \r
 108 Actually, this one was my fault from when I tweaked the control flow\r
 109 to use the MIME node context.\r