My apologies, but I had to bring this out.
The matter is about the drop out of the chapter dealing with GnuPG and
pgp2 interoperability from the manual.
As I understand it, the reason for dropping this chapter out is that it
would be dealing with patented algorithms, and that crashes with FSF's
philosophy.
Agreed ... to a point. To the point that everything that's being
offered is information on "how to deal with" ... how to communicate with
people using a non-free cryptosystem. If there was no movement towards
explaining how to import msword/wperfect/... docs with a free word
processor, or excel spreadsheets, or ...
Well, to be fair, that's not all that was being offered, but also the
posibility of installing rsa.c and idea.c for use within GnuPG (1). That
may make the drop out of the chapter (section) meaningful.
And yet, information on this issue is still highly required by users.
Not only pgp2, but also pgp5, and lately pgp6 compatibility with GnuPG
is an important issue. I'm not saying that GnuPG should try to be more
compatible with, or should implement this or that for compatibility
sake, that's up to the developers to decide. All I'm saying is that, if
some degree of interoperability already exists, why should it be treated
as if it were some kind of taboo?
Since issue (1) may be a reason enough not to include the section in the
manual (as the manual will be GPLed), then there's still a need for an
"aside guide" covering these aspects. Not only Kyle Hasselbacher's
recent document on "GPG compatibility with PGP 2.x", but also Caskey L.
Dickson's old document on "PGP 5.x conversion to GnuPG", or any other
related forthcoming issue(*).
[Discharge]
Well, that was just my opinion, and not a matter of faith for me. So,
please, don't throw me overboard if you feel I'm wrong, just tell me so.
By no means do I intend to start a political debate here.
(*) these issues may be related to pgp6, or certifying authorities, or
any other.
p.d. if installing and using rsa.c and idea.c ith GnuPG may be
illegal, wouldn't it be the same if using pgp2?
Regards,
--
Horacio
homega@ciberia.es
Valencia - ESPAÑA
The matter is about the drop out of the chapter dealing with GnuPG and
pgp2 interoperability from the manual.
As I understand it, the reason for dropping this chapter out is that it
would be dealing with patented algorithms, and that crashes with FSF's
philosophy.
Agreed ... to a point. To the point that everything that's being
offered is information on "how to deal with" ... how to communicate with
people using a non-free cryptosystem. If there was no movement towards
explaining how to import msword/wperfect/... docs with a free word
processor, or excel spreadsheets, or ...
Well, to be fair, that's not all that was being offered, but also the
posibility of installing rsa.c and idea.c for use within GnuPG (1). That
may make the drop out of the chapter (section) meaningful.
And yet, information on this issue is still highly required by users.
Not only pgp2, but also pgp5, and lately pgp6 compatibility with GnuPG
is an important issue. I'm not saying that GnuPG should try to be more
compatible with, or should implement this or that for compatibility
sake, that's up to the developers to decide. All I'm saying is that, if
some degree of interoperability already exists, why should it be treated
as if it were some kind of taboo?
Since issue (1) may be a reason enough not to include the section in the
manual (as the manual will be GPLed), then there's still a need for an
"aside guide" covering these aspects. Not only Kyle Hasselbacher's
recent document on "GPG compatibility with PGP 2.x", but also Caskey L.
Dickson's old document on "PGP 5.x conversion to GnuPG", or any other
related forthcoming issue(*).
[Discharge]
Well, that was just my opinion, and not a matter of faith for me. So,
please, don't throw me overboard if you feel I'm wrong, just tell me so.
By no means do I intend to start a political debate here.
(*) these issues may be related to pgp6, or certifying authorities, or
any other.
p.d. if installing and using rsa.c and idea.c ith GnuPG may be
illegal, wouldn't it be the same if using pgp2?
Regards,
--
Horacio
homega@ciberia.es
Valencia - ESPAÑA