Which GPG version?
peter at digitalbrains.com
Wed Aug 10 11:16:24 CEST 2016
On 01/08/16 21:48, Patrick Brunschwig wrote:
> I see the world a little different :-)
The world even! :-)
> If you want to try new features like curve-based encryption, or if you
> are a developer, then go for 2.1. Otherwise, if you are a regular
> end-user, then go for 2.0 and wait with upgrading until 2.1 has become
> mature. This will result in 2.2 being released.
What do you base this view upon? I based my advice upon two instances I can
remember Werner expressing his view about this:
On 04/05/16 11:55, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Wed, 4 May 2016 11:40, peter at digitalbrains.com said:
>> Werner, would you recommend they use 2.1 or 2.0 for the Debian Live CD?
> 2.1 of course
Note that this is about a Live CD which is expected to be used by people with
larger than average security concerns. You mention the "regular end-user"
yourself. I'd say some of the intended audience of the Live CD have more
stringent needs even than the "regular end-user". On the other hand, a Live CD
for key management is a quite different scenario than day-to-day use on a
And the second, thanks to Lachlan Gunn for reminding me the other day:
On 02/06/16 21:47, Werner Koch wrote:
> On Thu, 2 Jun 2016 12:43, dashohoxha at gmail.com said:
>> How far is the branch 2.1 from a stable release?
> it is not just stable, but modern! Go and use it.
So what makes you say that 2.1 will not be for end-users until 2.2 has been
released? I don't think that is the versioning model of the GnuPG project. It
wasn't during the 1.4/2.0 period, before 2.1 was released.
I use the GNU Privacy Guard (GnuPG) in combination with Enigmail.
You can send me encrypted mail if you want some privacy.
My key is available at <http://digitalbrains.com/2012/openpgp-key-peter>
More information about the Gnupg-users