begging for pyme name change
vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Oct 18 21:02:02 CEST 2016
> Windows is not a second class citizen. I am pretty sure that more gpg
> encrypted mails are sent from Windows hosts than from any other OS.
I meant from the toolchain point of view. Unfortunately, many users expect to use Microsoft toolchains for Windows and not mingw or other free options.
> And yes, it is political: We fully support Windows because a( privacy is
> important and b) we want to make it easier to eventually switch over to
> a free and and less prone to backdoors platform for all users
Amen to that.
It's not technically impossible (AFAIK) to have libgpgme built using a Microsoft toolchain, is what I meant. There might be problems linking a libgpgme built using gcc with other software built using MSVC. I make no value judgements about the qualities of either toolchain - it's just that some customers expect to use the MS toolchain for their applications, and using a gcc-built libgpgme there might be problematic.
Of course, wrapping gpg.exe avoids these issues altogether.
Another thing you said was that "not all features of gpg will be supported by GPGME". If that is the case, it seems to mean that wrapping over gpg.exe will be needed to get access to all features of GnuPG, or have I misunderstood?
> That was actually changed with 2.0.10 in 2009
Ah - my mistake. I hadn't realised this, thanks for making it clear.
More information about the Gnupg-devel