On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 08:51:35AM -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote: > On Wed 2017-04-19 04:55:14 +0200, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > > > "The upgrade to "modern" GnuPG has been made as smooth as possible by > > offering > > migration scripts. > > Actually, i consider the one migration script that we offer > (migrate-pubring-from-classic-gpg) to be the least smooth part of the > process. The most smooth part of the process has been the work upstream > to make the upgraded gpg Just Work. I don't think that drawing > attention to the migration script (which shouldn't be necessary for most > people) in the release notes is a great idea. > > > However, beware: The upgrade comes with some subtle differences in > > GnuPG's interface. > > I think this bit might just be alarmism, and i'm not sure whether we > gain anything by it. Any major version upgrade of anything comes with > some subtle differences, no? > > > See /usr/share/doc/gnupg/README.Debian for more information." > > I'd be fine with adding this sentence to the end of the first > paragraph if people think that would be useful. > > > Rationale: I'm thinking of e.g. 'all access to secret key material is > > handled > > by gpg-agent'. > > sure. Also, all network access is handled by dirmngr. and smartcard > access is handled by scdaemon. and there are new and better primitives > for automation. and we have upstream-supported python-bindings for > libgpgme. and a lot of other changes :) > > but we want to keep the release notes short, right? if they're not > short, no one will read them, in which case we might as well not write > them in the first place, since (as you point out) all of these details > are surely shipped in various README.Debian and NEWS files already > anyway.
You have a point. Let's add "See /usr/share/doc/gnupg/README.Debian for more information." to the end of the first paragraph and be done with it. I _might_ have time (and the needed access, iirc) to that myself one of those days. Thanks for your reply, Bye, Joost
