Re: Draft of Git Rev News edition 26

From: Michael J Gruber <git@grubix.eu>
Date: Apr 19, 2017, 07:49 UTC
Message-ID: <40c969f2-636e-f977-e385-d490f37f0ffa@grubix.eu>
In-Reply-To: <CAP8UFD3G_m1q6tORDRpfqWXQwrtpx-xQTqxfj0K=xU5WdEC+uw@mail.gmail.com>

Christian Couder venit, vidit, dixit 17.04.2017 16:33:

Show 26 quoted lines

> Hi,
> 
> A draft of a new Git Rev News edition is available here:
> 
>   https://github.com/git/git.github.io/blob/master/rev_news/drafts/edition-26.md
> 
> Everyone is welcome to contribute in any section either by editing the
> above page on GitHub and sending a pull request, or by commenting on
> this GitHub issue:
> 
>   https://github.com/git/git.github.io/issues/238
> 
> You can also reply to this email.
> 
> In general all kinds of contribution, for example proofreading,
> suggestions for articles or links, help on the issues in GitHub, and
> so on, are very much appreciated.
> 
> I tried to cc everyone who appears in this edition, but maybe I missed
> some people, sorry about that.
> 
> Thomas, Jakub, Markus and myself plan to publish this edition on
> Wednesday April 19th.
> 
> Thanks,
> Christian.

Hi Christian,

Thanks for the ping on the draft.

Re gpg: Maybe some valuable point of information is what Werner Koch himself said in that thread: "That [the command line is not a stable API to GnuPG] is not true. The command line interface has been stable for the last 19 years. We only removed a left over PGP-2 backward compatibility in 2.1 (-kvv). I doubt that this has even been noticed."

I think our conclusion was that on Git's side, there is no problem to solve (except, maybe, to use gpg2 by default when gpg is not installed) because the main problem is mixed installations of gpg1 and gpg2.1+, and we don't want to use a library instead of the command line API for the reasons mentioned by Linus and others.

Michael