On Sat 2016-09-10 13:00:26 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> As i understand it from a talk given by Andre Heinecke (GPGME upstream,
> cc'ed here) at OpenPGP.conf, GPGME 1.7.0 is likely to take over as
> upstream from pyme, gpgmepp, and qgpgme.  (it will also add a
> common-lisp binding, but that's not in debian at all, so i'll ignore it
> for now).  1.7.0 isn't yet released, but it sounds like the release is
> due fairly soon.

1.7.0 was released a couple days ago, and i just uploaded it to debian
unstable, along with a fair bit of debian packaging cleanup.

The source package i uploaded currently only builds the C library.  It
does not build or attempt to ship the python, common-lisp, c++, or qt
bindings yet.

> I don't think it'd be unreasonable for the debian GnuPG packaging team
> take on these additional binary packages within the gpgme1.0 source
> package, which would mean that the source packages for python-pyme, and
> gpgmepp would probably go away, and the kdepimlibs library would stop
> building libqgpgme1 and libgpgme++2v5.

I plan to work in experimental for a version that will produce the
python3 bindings -- binary package python3-pyme in particular.  I'm not
yet aiming to "hijack" the 2.x bindings with this source package, since
i haven't heard from Arnaud.

Arnaud, at some point we should let the gpgme1.0 source package take
over the python-pyme binary package, though, since i understand that it
is now python2-compatible upstream.  I haven't heard back from you here,
but given that the transition has happened upstream, i hope it will be
OK.  Would you like to help out with this?  I'd be happy to have your
input and experience on the python bits (and elsewhere if you're

If someone wants to collaborate on doing the same kind of work for qt
and c++, i'm happy to coordinate via the pkg-gnupg-maint git repo,
and/or on IRC #debian-gnupg on oftc.


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to