No subject

[Daniel Jay Haskin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

I have noticed that gnupg 2.1 has been in beta for four years. I have also seen Werner say on this mailing list that he has used 2.1 "for years now". I wonder if there is a measure by which the four-year-old version shall be considered stable. If so, what is it? If not, or if there is a reason other than a technical reason for not calling it stable, it makes me feel like a four year old branch, having had many bug fixes, is ready for production no matter matter what we call it.

I realize my view is probably uneducated, and I only bring this up because I am truly curious. If anyone can supply explanation, I'm all ears :)

Thanks
- --
Daniel Jay Haskin
http://djhaskin987.github.io/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: APG v1.1.1
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=QU5+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----