Will gpg 1.x remain supported for the foreseeable future?

[Todd Zullinger]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> - might save time and anguish if apt-key (and thus gpg[v]?) accepted
> armored keyrings even if filename ends in .gpg

I think that's https://dev.gnupg.org/T2290, in case you want
to follow it or submit a patch to implement it.  Werner did
provide some details about how it would ideally be done.

If I was more capable with C, I'd give it a try since I'd
like to see gpgv work with armored keyrings too.

-- 
Todd
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to
find easier ways to do something.
    -- Robert Heinlein

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 543 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/attachments/20180120/0a90f58f/attachment.sig>