> When the GnuPG default was not to show the key usage, I would have said: > unnecessary detail. In my opinion, in a very broad sense, the FAQ should be > aimed at people sticking to the defaults, not the people who tinker.
Let me put on the maintainer hat and speak ex cathedra a moment: The FAQ is aimed at Qs that are F Aed. The answers it provides are aimed at new and/or casual users, not tinkerers, and this focus will not change. Once a FAQ becomes a tinkering manual, the content explodes and so does the size of the maintainer's job. For my own sanity, I won't let it become a tinkering guide. > I do think it should be documented in a document that a beginner ought to > read. > I don't know if it belongs in the FAQ; I would be equally satistied with it > being in the GNU Privacy Handbook. I suspect the FAQ is appropriate. If we're going to present information to new users, we should anticipate them having questions about it. > How well maintained is [the GNU Privacy Handbook] anyway? It's not, as near as I can tell. Some of their GnuPG examples are from version 0.9.4, which is 17 years old. One would think periodic maintenance would have led to these examples being updated. For that reason, my suspicion is it's unmaintained. Further, I can't recall the last time I saw the maintainer (Mike Ashley) post here. _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
