<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 22/05/2018 02:39, Mark Rousell wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:5B0374CF.9000608@signal100.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Get real. These people are long-time GnuPG users and now you want
to throw them under the bus because... well, because you prefer it
that way. No, that's not a fair, it's not reasonable, it's not
ethical, or it's even professional. [etc etc]<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
On re-reading the above message, I apologise if the language I used
was provocative. However, the points I made are nevertheless valid
in my opinion.<br>
<br>
Proposing cutting off maintenance of the only maintained route to
decrypt certain data is provocative, of course. ;-) As I observed,
it is not necessary to cut off maintained ability to decrypt
historical data (surely a valid real world use case) in order to
prevent users from encrypting new data with legacy standards.<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Mark Rousell</pre>
</body>
</html>