| 1 |
W dniu śro, 04.07.2018 o godzinie 10∶51 +0200, użytkownik Kristian |
| 2 |
Fiskerstrand napisał: |
| 3 |
> On 07/04/2018 10:42 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 4 |
> > 1. I suppose the ECC/cv25519 packets won't change in incompatible manner |
| 5 |
> > at this point. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> It being implemented in gnupg-2-2 is a good indication it won't be |
| 8 |
> allowed to change at this point |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > 2. Hardware incompatibility issues are not really relevant to us but to |
| 12 |
> > the person using the key. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> It is relevant to us to the extent of discussion for hardware token for devs |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Sure but I think that's the matter of 'recommended' vs 'minimal'. |
| 18 |
But that part of the GLEP probably needs to change/be clarified as well. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> > |
| 21 |
> > 3. Developer keys are mostly for internal use, while the majority of |
| 22 |
> > users verify only the infra signatures, so I don't think we have to be |
| 23 |
> > that concerned about interoperability of the algos, provided that it |
| 24 |
> > works for infra purposes. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> This depends on the discussion of rsync vs git, if you expect end-users |
| 27 |
> to verify git commits from developers directly you require them to use |
| 28 |
> the 2.2 branch, whereby some server users prefer 1.4 for its smaller |
| 29 |
> footprint etc. If we conclude that the git repo is internal and not to |
| 30 |
> be exposed to end-users per se, but distribution happens in curated git |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I honestly don't think Gentoo is the distribution where we let people |
| 33 |
stay with obsolete versions for 'smaller footprint'. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Best regards, |
| 37 |
Michał Górny |
Archives