[Gpg4win-users-en] packaging sylpheed or sylpheed-claws?

[Bernhard Reiter]

rdo at mail.bg wrote:
> > I'm just wondering, why did you choose to distribute
> > Sylpheed-Claws instead of Sylpheed?
> > I see Sylpheed have stable and usable win32 port.

I do not know for sure, but I guess that Sylpheed does not have the necessary 
gpgme support to connect to the crypto backend.

On Monday 18 September 2006 09:54, Michal Skrzypek wrote:
>     Please don't. The feature set of simple Sylpheed is no match for
> Sylpheed-Claws. I know, that the stability is also important, but it
> will be achieved eventually... I hope :)

The work is done and we and the sylpheed-claws group is looking for help
with the sylpheed-windows port.

Bernhard

-- 
Managing Director - Owner, www.intevation.net       (Free Software Company)
Germany Coordinator, fsfeurope.org       (Non-Profit Org for Free Software)
www.kolab-konsortium.com   (Email/Groupware Solution, Professional Service)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.wald.intevation.org/pipermail/gpg4win-users-en/attachments/20060918/8671991b/attachment.sig>