From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Re: Making GNUS continue to work with Gmail Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 10:23:15 +0200 Message-ID: <20200817082315.GB13459@tuxteam.de> References: <875z9p5hnc.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <87364pbkn0.fsf@gnus.org> <87lfihe0zf.fsf@mat.ucm.es> <874kp55l8t.fsf@gnus.org> <36ed8579.3c38.173fb016f00.Coremail.m_pupil@163.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="U+BazGySraz5kW0T" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="13266"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 17 10:23:54 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k7aQr-0003Np-CR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 10:23:53 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53748 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k7aQq-00077b-DF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 04:23:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38486) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k7aQL-0006i3-JB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 04:23:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]:43837) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1k7aQI-0001dj-UA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 04:23:21 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:Date; bh=SA55hic0J5gamNBRKMdtA2rlOnzOURNSXMJ+/yFuhCU=; b=b/ftGabIXxyrOdK/IyDKKvrGbwvGuaziTwonGnTmLka9n8n00q/QwpjQa8/Y628bxM5zrnhwjr96iQMzqkCZyN6SLmwAmMFsZFA/kEJbozCrqh98PTT3FGYdOPv63+98dXaPQZM09alayjETi2UidpM/8lSN/1tcaEjGWEl3tmvjnnsLGQYZuAm5bPyauWQOJEQ/Wm9Pmqe5tfiKZKibkB7F0eWuIsde+aC9qHD4CTLMSD8g9azBNdpekuvaMd+Td+Ynek0e94M84rIxX8iEOGRePe3ascuCS8YMeVg+DdvJ5nwMrqEJVjybatpKPTyDYGNhYjrOPgnvLXiQ3xHF2Q==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1k7aQF-0003qD-8w for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 10:23:15 +0200 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <36ed8579.3c38.173fb016f00.Coremail.m_pupil@163.com> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/08/17 04:12:34 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 3.1-3.10 [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:253873 Archived-At: --U+BazGySraz5kW0T Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 02:00:41PM +0800, =E8=8C=83=E5=87=AF wrote: > Is it possiable to just use the application specific password? This is Gregory's option (2), right? He explains the drawbacks of this approach: Google doesn't *want* that the app's users see the password. But the app is free software, so *we* want that the users see everything in the app. I think this goes deeper: Google wants to be in control and we want the user to be in control. This leads to a conflict whenever the user is not Google. Cheers - t --U+BazGySraz5kW0T Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAl86PnMACgkQBcgs9XrR2kYHmQCdEecydYW8AN5hDKh6aK3B7jkd OUUAn2vnYs8+IDTxlwxecGjniQj5PVG6 =GMoW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --U+BazGySraz5kW0T--