> From my perspective, until the majority of OS' that ship GnuPG are 
> shipping 2.x by default, removing 1.x support is premature.

This would be a problem if the OSes that ship Enigmail had no way to
make GnuPG 2 a dependency.  Virtually all of them do, so I don't see the
problem.

> I get the party line that we encourage people to use the packaged 
> version, which will fix the dependency problem, etc. etc. But we've 
> benefited from a significant decrease in support problems ever since
> the machine-dependent code was removed from Enigmail, and "You must
> use the packaged version!" became untrue.

It didn't become untrue.  The point still remains that packagers are
allowed to do basically anything they want to Thunderbird, and we only
check the Enigmail available on our site against the Thunderbird
released by Mozilla.

Your distro does QA testing on the Enigmail it ships with its own
Thunderbird.

When you use our Enigmail release with your distro's Thunderbird
release, there is *no* QA testing on that configuration.

As a rule, I refuse to recommend packages without QA testing to everyday
users.  For that reason, I think the rule we have is a good one and I
want to see it continue.  And if we keep that rule, then this entire
argument becomes moot.

> What you're proposing will create a whole new set of support
> problems, starting with the return of "You must use the packaged
> version!" on Linux, and similar platforms.

It's not "the return of".  Our guidance on that has never changed.
Regular users should use packages provided by their distros, and only
use our package if they downloaded Thunderbird from Mozilla.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

_______________________________________________
enigmail-users mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or make changes to your subscription click here:
https://admin.hostpoint.ch/mailman/listinfo/enigmail-users_enigmail.net

Reply via email to