gpa and gpgex in gpg 2.1.x releases for windows.

Werner Koch wk at
Mon Jul 20 20:24:44 CEST 2015

On Mon, 20 Jul 2015 18:32, rjh at said:

> If your objection to MSI is on purely libre grounds, this may change
> things.  If your objection is that it's an awful packaging standard, well...

Neither of them.  MSI is a very good packaging system but to make good
use of it you need to use it in a fine-grained manner and not just with
huge packages.  For example the current 2.1.x installer would need to be
split up in maybe a dozen separate MSI files much like it is done in
Linux distributions.  The main work will then be to maintain the
dependencies.  We can easily do that for most parts of GnuPG but there
are external packages which should be shared with other applications
(think: zlib) and this raises the question who will be responsible for
this.  Windows\Debian, or Windows\Fedora, or Windows\Gentoo, etc ....

Without that we won't have a package management system but several of
them and don't get rid of all the ugly hacks and annoyances.



Die Gedanken sind frei.  Ausnahmen regelt ein Bundesgesetz.

More information about the Gnupg-users mailing list