From: Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net>
To: Notmuch Mail <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>
Subject: Re: Emacs: Crypto: How to get automatic encryption?
In-Reply-To: <87fwfw8npx.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
References: <20120103195651.GA27869@shi.workgroup>
	<87fwfw8npx.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
User-Agent: Notmuch/0.10.2+168~g34b8bac (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1
	(x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:41:31 -0800
Message-ID: <87k44wlq5g.fsf@servo.finestructure.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";
	micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Precedence: list

--=-=-=
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 13:45:14 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestr=
ucture.net> wrote:
> Unfortunately, auto encrypting of replies to encrypted emails is not yet
> implemented.  It is desperately needed, though, obviously.  So this is a
> good excuse to start a discussion about how we could achieve this.
>=20
> It just occurs to me that a way to do this would be to have notmuch
> reply add the appropriate mml #secure tag for encryption to the output
> reply template, maybe with something like a --emacs option.  That would
> be pretty easy to implement, although it would obviously be very UI
> specific.
>=20
> Another possibility would be for notmuch reply to add some sort of
> header to the reply message to indicate that the original was encrypted,
> and then do something in emacs to try to read that header and add the
> appropriate mml #secure tag.  That would also be easy to implement in
> the notmuch CLI, and it would be more UI agnostic, but it would require
> a lot more elisp.

There is a set of patches in the queue to add a JSON output format for
reply, with the emacs UI then consuming that to construct the reply
template [0].  This will make it very easy to communicate to the emacs
UI that the original message was encrypted, and that the reply should be
similarly encrypted.  I'm going to wait until that patch set makes it
through, and then build this functionality on top of that.

jamie.

[0] id:"1326009162-19524-3-git-send-email-awg+notmuch@xvx.ca"

--=-=-=
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)

iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJPDylcAAoJEO00zqvie6q8soAP/0WkpELUJo702xcVnxV0l/4e
SMzDe7GWjrUMdTeR4+ee0nkbAGFOJhXFN4VOG+WCKNdMjOUOa5b3SN9Hj0nZESxg
LvSKBPzyjDz3/Fet5HEGgcD1KkjPWwOKlqb6ehSSi99O4DRRoKxLCgtlNK1jy1nb
CxkQ4WC4FzLDQxJZZ3ym86hr+q9hV0wMtz+P1CyMTYBQGIwHpVw5knttT6JJrH31
1ZtR5RUDykdgasuoWblQkYRffPuwV6O9/V7Hzmhi2Ki/dg/m7+EZER2ESu12FhHa
IoL/PfukALXmW1f1PmDyjE7RTWEhtfLwwYjy5eymL0TAW2pRC+A6DBcLZru7iV1x
0KzO85VWTPr3VkGZ9uV3a2rNTXWcCsZPC6GWktpxaaDzX+JoK+KcjSvL9rafjt+X
gyQuIeHK76PrbLMUdWakACQNzqFavCdMC9jKFthcIAoPtZlxV6kQvLnsz5nR2hqR
Aowo9CLhV965wDlL6zC61xVFYII469SkXpXbjjZ0SAz/vZ0NArzSbQrcqmbCoWhd
Ag3DlyxosYcWLU68eUmT4lO+W8Qo4L8uIrjDNXbZ+xCV1eRvf5uf2+aN6IOMtjya
13neYw3M2Lzxins0D6wYHJRrr63IzFR1utZs6oI05JsASJV6JRRSvE/A4qTXMtT9
YXK1ioq/NVGRaSpqJRI3
=80nC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--=-=-=--