Hi! On Sat, 2026-03-07 at 18:56:12 +0100, hede wrote: > For the trixie release notes, especially for the > “Upgrades from Debian 12 (bookworm)” section, it probably is a > bad idea to change the .gpg file extensions to .pgp as the > changes to the .pgp file extension for the files in the > filesystem was done in the trixie release cycle and is not > present within bookworm. > The Upgrade from bookworm fails with .pgp in here.
Ah, I initially thought this comment was confusing devref with the rel-notes (as it otherwise seemed misplaced here), but I see now there was a change done on the rel-notes related to this (which still seems misplaced here, and the proposed change in this report seems correct to me). I've not checked the context of the rel-notes change, but switching the pathnames to the keyrings should only be done after a Debian system has been fully upgraded to Debian trixie (not before), because the keyring renames were done only in Debian trixie. If the current text proposes doing that before the upgrade, I think that instead of reverting that change, it would be better to mention that the user should be doing this after the upgrade to avoid having to remember to do it on a next upgrade where there might no longer be a .gpg symlink anymore. > btw: > (And this is not a GnuPG artifact, but an OpenPGP one. :) > > If this change was rushed because of the GnuPG vs. OpenPGP controversity, > please revise this kind of emotional changes. > And please do not add an updated package to old bookwork just to show us > that .pgp is yet the one to get used here and .gpg is bad. That probably > will have other side effects and unforeseen drawbacks... > There's nothing wrong with having the .gpg extension in the current > upgrade guidance and to change this with the next or one of the upcoming > releases. Using .gpg for OpenPGP artifacts has always been wrong as there's always been other implementations. Now that GnuPG has decided to get off the OpenPGP RFC process and implementation, it's also in addition very confusing and misleading, it's also unfair to other implementations, and creates an unnatural lock-in by association. I've been going around trying to correct this for years now (5 or more?), so this is not an "emotional change", it is a change for correctness, clarification and fairness. (Using .gpg for LibrePGP artifacts would make perfect sense to me for example.) But I agree that phasing it out should be done carefully, taking backwards compatibility into account (when pathnames are "an interface"), and that's why I didn't propose a change to the rel-notes in trixie, I was waiting for forky (but as mentioned above I think the users can already be notified about this to be done post-upgrade). Thanks, Guillem
