On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:53:00PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 09:50:01AM -0400, Leo Famulari wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 02:09:41PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > > > Leo Famulari <l...@famulari.name> skribis: > > > > > > > There was discussion of installing the gnupg-2.1 binaries 'gpg2' and > > > > 'gpgv2' as 'gpg' and 'gpgv' on the 'Trustable guix pull' thread [0]. > > > > The configuration option does not exist for gnupg-2.0. > > > Really? Then we should do the same by hand, I guess. > > Any volunteers? ;)
To clarify, I don't look forward to finding out if I'd have to patch the man page, the info document, etc. > Why not just drop gpg-2.0 then? All three GnuPG branches (1.4, 2.0, 2.1) are actively maintained. Why drop 2.0?
