Subject: bug#8050: Gnus does not connect to my IMAP server any more

From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:22:55 -0500

SM> And when asking me whether to save the password (which it asks even
SM> tough the authentication fails :-() the prompt is again too verbose
SM> asking me

SM> "Add to .authinfo.gpg? (y)es/(n)o but use it/(e)dit line/(s)kip file"

SM> First, it's hard to parse, second I don't know what "no but use it"
SM> might mean, 

> It means "don't write it to the file but remember the password."

Just call it "(n)o", then (after all, the question is "Add to
.authinfo.gpg?"); especially since you don't offer the option to not
remember the password.

SM> I don't know what "line" I might want to "edit" (nor why it's
SM> related to saving a password), 

> authinfo/netrc files are line-based.

That's an irrelevant detail.  Obviously those files store several
passwords, so they contain a "list/set" of "entries".  Whether those
entries are represented by a single line doesn't matter (you'd still
want to be able to see/edit the whole record even if it was represented
by a multi-line chunk of text or some fixed-length binary
representation, or whathaveyou).

> You may want to edit the line in case you want to change it before it's
> written.  Lars also thought this was not good but I feel strongly this
> is useful functionality and it's not too intrusive.

What's the advantage of editing it before (which requires this funky
prompt, or an additional prompt) rather than after (which requires no
special support)?  Why is Gnus the only application that finds this
functionality useful enough to pester every user every time it asks for
a password?

SM> and neither do I know what means "skip file".
> It means "go to the next source in the auth-sources list, I don't want
> to change this one."

Then it's not "skip file" but "other file".

SM> Please make it just "Save password to .authinfo.gpg?  [y/n/N/?]"  or
SM> something short and simple like that.

> I was trying to avoid the help popup but you're right the prompt is too
> verbose.

> "Save password" does not describe what's going on fully.

Why not?  Maybe the problem is that it does more.

> Maybe just "save to $file" would be better than "add to $file."

Fine by me, tho in either case it would be good to hint at *what* is
saved, so "save password" would be welcome.

> The prompting could be, compared to the old 
> "(y)es/(n)o but use it/(e)dit line/(s)kip file":

> y/n/N/e/s/? => (y)es, save; (n)o but use the info; (N)o and don't use
> the info and don't ask again; (e)dit the line; (s)kip this file.

> I see two cases for (N): one, you want to use the password just entered
> and don't want to be asked to *save* again;

Yes, that would be the one I want to type.

> two, you don't want to use the password

I don't know what that could mean.  The user has just gone through the
trouble of typing the password, so surely she wants to use it somehow.
The other N I can think of is "don't remember this password even in this
session", which corresponds to one of the 2 options in Emacs-23 (where
you had no option to save the password, but you had to choose between
"save for the session" or "not save for the session").

> Do you think that skipping to the next file in auth-sources is not
> useful?

Definitely.

        Stefan