From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: michael+sup@stapelberg.de (Michael Stapelberg)
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:27:40 +0200
Subject: [sup-talk] [PATCH] more inline GPG madness
In-Reply-To: <1254348163-sup-6170@midna.zekjur.net>
References: <1254348163-sup-6170@midna.zekjur.net>
Message-ID: <1254417896-sup-2359@midna.zekjur.net>

Hi,

Excerpts from Michael Stapelberg's message of Do Okt 01 00:08:39 +0200 2009:
> Attached comes a patch which fixes the behaviour. However (!) the patch is not
> well aligned, the error case (else) is untested and should probably be handled
> differently and the old_charset line can probably be written more elegantly in
> ruby. By the way, the charset stuff is necessary to get the correct character
> set for messages which are sent inline. I really start to dislike Thunderbird
> and other crappy software for that :-\.

I am sorry for the confusion. Please do not merge this patch without close
review if these PGP headers are valid at all. Turns out the headers were
produced by a custom procmail rule I had forgotton about.

I will instead implement support for "correct" inline GPG.

Best regards,
Michael