W dniu śro, 04.07.2018 o godzinie 10∶51 +0200, użytkownik Kristian Fiskerstrand napisał: > On 07/04/2018 10:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > 1. I suppose the ECC/cv25519 packets won't change in incompatible manner > > at this point. > > It being implemented in gnupg-2-2 is a good indication it won't be > allowed to change at this point > > > > > 2. Hardware incompatibility issues are not really relevant to us but to > > the person using the key. > > It is relevant to us to the extent of discussion for hardware token for devs >
Sure but I think that's the matter of 'recommended' vs 'minimal'. But that part of the GLEP probably needs to change/be clarified as well. > > > > 3. Developer keys are mostly for internal use, while the majority of > > users verify only the infra signatures, so I don't think we have to be > > that concerned about interoperability of the algos, provided that it > > works for infra purposes. > > This depends on the discussion of rsync vs git, if you expect end-users > to verify git commits from developers directly you require them to use > the 2.2 branch, whereby some server users prefer 1.4 for its smaller > footprint etc. If we conclude that the git repo is internal and not to > be exposed to end-users per se, but distribution happens in curated git I honestly don't think Gentoo is the distribution where we let people stay with obsolete versions for 'smaller footprint'. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
