[OTR-dev] OTR encryption state

[verbal]

i totally agree with that, but it may be worth the work. i'm not sure.
it depends on what people think will be best for the user. someone
else weigh the cost/benefit ratio here between code
complexity/portability vs UI enchancement. =)

verbal


On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 18:07:33 -0600, Evan Schoenberg <evan.s at dreskin.net> wrote:
> Implementing these modes requires more changes, and it sounds like more
> library-level changes, than just making it not automatically
> re-negotiate (the automatic re-negotiation could even occur iff a
> callback to the libotr's UI returns YES, so the behavior could be
> customized [or not] as desired)... "emulating" a fix to a problem
> instead of just fixing it isn't a good idea in my opinion, and fixing
> it would provide a more intuitive user experience and less complex user
> interface.
> 
> -Evan
> 
> On Jan 26, 2005, at 5:56 PM, verbal wrote:
> 
> >> No matter who I am talking to, if I stop encryption while in an OTR
> >> chat, it should not turn itself back on.  This isn't a per-contact
> >> thing...
> >>
> >
> > yes, you're right. while we see it as a problem, i think greg is
> > saying that this functionality should be "emulated" by having the user
> > set the different modes of operation. so if i wanted to turn
> > encryption off, i would just goto mode 1. that's the way i see it
> > anyways.
> >
> > verbal
> >
> 
>