User talk:Andreymal

From ArchWiki
Latest comment: 10 January by Davezerave in topic OpenPGP standardization

Для чего был откат версии? Не совсем понимаю.

Номер ревизии в шаблоне TranslationStatus указывает на ревизию английской статьи, которая была взята в качестве основы для перевода, и она используется для генерации ссылки на изменения английской статьи, произошедшие с момента последнего перевода. Сейчас статья PCManFM (Русский) свежепереведённая и изменений пока что нет, а посмотреть, как это работает на практике, можно в каком-нибудь старом переводе (например, KDE (Русский)), ткнув в ссылку «изменения». -- andreymal (talk) 20:35, 29 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My bad

You're right for reverting my last edit on psd, Help:Style/Formatting and punctuation#Executable/application names even says "this rule applies to executables only when they represent the application/file itself, not when used in #CLI lines"… --Erus Iluvatar (talk) 16:05, 11 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gitea section 4.7.1 modification

Thanks for the undo, my bad, this only applies when not using the root location. Going to let a comment on the discussion in case someone else's config didn't work as it is shown in section 4.7.1. --RubenSalinas (talk) 00:05, 7 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OATH ≠ OAuth. Does OAuth == Oauth?

Since you reverted special:diff/793923, perhaps you can tell. Does OAuth, from Yandex Disk#Commands token fundamentally, or even fully, the same as w:OAuth? The context is special:diff/793987. Regid (talk) 15:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Probably yes (but I can't be 100% sure without reading the source code). (In general, I think mentioning OAuth is useless here because it's just an implementation detail, but it's also mentioned in the upstream documentation for some reason and I don't plan to do anything about it) — andreymal (talk) 15:19, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

OpenPGP standardization

Hi! I just saw your edit for the OpenPGP#Standardization section and I understand how it may seem a bit out of place. However, given the issues we have with GnuPG (e.g. GnuPG#Disable_unsupported_AEAD_mechanism and the automatic advertisement of a "version 5" packet) I will have to patch gnupg even further and I will add a more detailed warning to the GnuPG article as well in regards to compatibility issues.

Since this is an issue with GnuPG breaking interoperability with other OpenPGP implementations and clients (see e.g. I want to have a not-so-dense summary section which outlines where the current standardization is and in what relation GnuPG stands to it and how and why we are patching it the way we do.

This will require a bit more research and testing over the coming days, but the above is in essence why that standardization section exists and it would be great if it was not removed! :)

Davezerave (talk) 21:10, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]