On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 07:29:26 -0800 "Brian C. Lane" <bcl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I am opposed to this. If a tool wants/needs to > use v2 it should be using gpg2 not gpg. gpg v1.4.x is still active > upstream and is shipped as gpg so we shouldn't be renaming it. Is there any sense upstream how much longer 1.x will be still supported? I was unaware it was still being maintained, so yeah, seems like a bad idea to change it until it's gone. kevin
Attachment:
pgpJWF_UuyqTY.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
