On 01.08.16 19:28, Peter Lebbing wrote: > On 01/08/16 17:54, whi...@mixnym.net wrote: >> I see that there are three versions of GnuPG available. Assuming no hardware >> constraints, is there any reason to choose Classic 1.4 or Stable 2.0 instead >> of Modern 2.1? It appears to do everything the others can and more. > > I think usually the constraints are software constraints. But 1.4 might be > more > appropriate in for instance a headless server. I suppose that counts as a > hardware constraint indeed :-). > > I'd say, go for 2.1. I think 2.0 is more for people who wish to stick to 2.0 > for > whatever reason. If you don't have any particular motivation to use 2.0 or > 1.4, > you should go for 2.1.
I see the world a little different :-) 2.1 is the current development branch, where we sometimes see heavy changes that can cause bugs, crashes and incompatibilities with other software. 2.0 is stable and only receives a limited number of well-tested changes and security fixes. 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. Patrick _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
