On 03/19/2012 07:43 AM, Allan McRae wrote: > On 19/03/12 14:52, Gaetan Bisson wrote: >> [2012-03-19 08:20:34 +1000] Allan McRae: >>> I think thet gnupg1 is more suited to what _ALL_ Arch systems use gpgme >>> for. The simple verification of package signatures. >> >> Well, linux-2.6.27.62 would also be sufficient to run Arch. But we only >> package modern stable upstream releases, and certain users actually make >> use of their modern features. >> > > As I pointed out before, whether gnupg2 is a stable version or an > "unstable development version" > (http://www.gnupg.org/download/release_notes.en.html) is up for debate. > If that gets changed by upstream, then I will have no objection to > dropping gnupg1. > > Allan
did any of you actually asked upstream about this? :D -- Ionuț
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
