Re: epa command names

[Thierry Volpiatto <thierry.volpiatto@gmail.com>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>> I have switched to using epa instead of mailcrypt.  The only drawback
>> I see is that the command names are not natural; thus, remembering
>> them is extra work.
>> Shall we give them aliases without `epa-'?  For instance, define
>> `mail-encrypt' or `encrypt-mail' as an alias for `epa-mail-encrypt'?
>
> I don't much like this option because of the inability to handle
> conflicts.  I'd much rather make M-x a bit more permissive such that M-x
> mail-encrypt falls back to epa-mail-encrypt (probably via completion).
>
> One way is something along the lines of the `substring' completion-style
> (which we could restrict to substrings that start after a word boundary),
> but I think we'd want something less general.
>
> I'm thinking of a way for packages to say "if `mail-encrypt' is matched
> by the user's input, then include `epa-mail-encrypt' in the list of
> completion candidates".  This would handle conflicts very
> straightforwardly since if we have a second rule "if `mail-encrypt' is
> matched by the user's input, then include `superduper-mail-encrypt' in
> the list of completion candidates" M-x mail-encrypt TAB would simply
> provide both options as valid completion candidates.

anything does that actually.

http://tinyurl.com/cxwq73g

-- 
  Thierry
Get my Gnupg key:
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 59F29997