On 13 Sep 2025, at 18:00, Steffen Nurpmeso <[email protected]> wrote: > > Kai Engert via Gnupg-devel wrote in > <[email protected]>: > |sorry, there were two missing words here: > | > |On 9/13/25 13:11, Kai Engert wrote: > |> Despite your suggestion, some implementations might chose to > | > |... implement only ... > | > |> one of the > |> specifications. > > Wasn't the process unfair then given that certain implementations > created keys for years of an anticipated format that then did not > became reality?
Nobody was “creating v5 keys for years” other than testers and early adopters, they are only being generated by default since quite recently. A few other implementations had support for v5 keys since before the schism, but all except gnupg agreed to move to v6 once the issues with v5 signatures became known. A _______________________________________________ Gnupg-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-devel
