Re: [openpgp] Stop dragging around old material, please!

Hey Rick,

I just wanted to say that I didn't mean to dismiss your point of view,
and actually I agree with trying to get rid of legacy stuff. I'm not
sure if it's possible in this particular case but that doesn't mean
that it's not worth discussing, IMO.

There are in fact some things in the spec that I think implementations
*can* get away with not implementing; V3 keys and signatures being one
of them (we haven't supported it for quite a while).

It might still be worth having some place to clearly state that they're
deprecated, and what the issues with them are (i.e. [1]), but maybe
describing how to create or parse them is unnecessary. Of course,
others might again disagree with me there.

Best,
Daniel

[1]: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-openpgp-crypto-refresh-07#page-62

------- Original Message -------
On Thursday, November 17th, 2022 at 03:09, Rick van Rein <rick@openfortress.nl> wrote:

> Hello OpenPGP,
> 

> The responses I got represent a clear view on how specifications
> should be written. It happens to not be mine and if I reviewed as
> offered during #115 this would trigger a strong debate. Such a
> debate might interfere with progress.
> 

> Rather than doing this review, it is more constructive if I quietly
> let this work continue without my input. I will remove myself from
> the group and its related voting rights.
> 

> Good luck,
> -Rick
> 

> _______________________________________________
> openpgp mailing list
> openpgp@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/openpgp

Re: [openpgp] Stop dragging around old material, please!

Attachment: signature.asc