On 05/21/2018 02:57 PM, Mark Rousell wrote: > On 22/05/2018 02:39, Mark Rousell wrote: >> 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] > > 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.
Hey :) > 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. So is there anything that gpg v2.2 won't decrypt with the option "--ignore-mdc-error" specified? Or perhaps, with also other "Doing things one usually doesn't want to do." options? That is, are older versions really necessary? _______________________________________________ Gnupg-users mailing list Gnupg-users@gnupg.org http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users
