Re: Install gpg2 as gpg

[ludo@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)]

Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:

> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 12:56:58PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>> Leo Famulari <leo@famulari.name> skribis:
>> 
>> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 02:53:00PM +0200, Andreas Enge wrote:
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> >> Why not just drop gpg-2.0 then?
>> >
>> > All three GnuPG branches (1.4, 2.0, 2.1) are actively maintained. Why
>> > drop 2.0?
>> 
>> +1
>> 
>> Besides, I use 2.0, because for some reason 2.1 has always failed for me
>> (though I never took the time to investigate.)
>> 
>> Anyway, this patch is just about how we name the command.  That the
>> command is called ‘gpg2’ is a well-known annoyance, and Werner
>> recommends not doing that anyway.
>
> Is there a consensus on the way forward? Should we apply this patch to
> gnupg-2.1?

To me it seems the answer is “yes”.  If you want to be sure, please
leave another couple of days before pushing.  :-)

> Is anyone willing to test and maintain patches against gnupg-2.0 (not
> me)?

I can try to do that “eventually”, if nobody beats me at it.

Thanks,
Ludo’.