[PATCH] Allow signing of files which are not present on the system

Werner Koch wk at gnupg.org
Mon Aug 8 09:34:46 CEST 2011

On Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:31, gnupg+Steven.Murdoch at cl.cam.ac.uk said:

> I think that plan sounds good, although I still think it is worthwhile for me to
> finish off my patch and make it available to those who would like it sooner

I understand.  My concern is that we need to maintain your API for a
long time which I don't like in general but see below.  A way in between
would be to encode the machine information in the status file you write:
CPU, word size and endianess and gpg version should be sufficient for
1.4.x.  However this will require a lot of changes with no clear
advantage if we eventually put it all into libgcrypt.

OTOH, we try to fade out support for 1.4.  Thus if we clearly document
that this is a 1.4 only option which may change with any new release I
won't stand in your way of implementing it as it is right now.

> rather than later (I had another private request). Would it still be useful to
> do they copyright assignment?  If so, please let me know what I should do.

Okay, I attach the required templates.  In the hope that you may want to
contribute other stuff in the future, I send the assign-future template
and a text explaining why we need this all.  If you send stuff to the
FSF please CC me.



Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: conditions.text
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20110808/e9494b7f/attachment.text>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: request-assign.future
URL: </pipermail/attachments/20110808/e9494b7f/attachment.asc>

More information about the Gnupg-devel mailing list