From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0876158015 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2023 16:54:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A99A32BC042; Sat, 30 Dec 2023 16:54:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (mail.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 691242BC039 for ; Sat, 30 Dec 2023 16:54:19 +0000 (UTC) From: Ulrich Mueller To: "Andreas K. Huettel" Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] global USE=gpg In-Reply-To: <3547018.aeNJFYEL58@noumea> (Andreas K. Huettel's message of "Sat, 30 Dec 2023 16:54:03 +0100") References: <2018286ec127ba4ec7e27960db67e3b49a3cc620.camel@gentoo.org> <3547018.aeNJFYEL58@noumea> Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2023 17:54:10 +0100 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 67c6d80d-b67d-44df-8a08-b2bc59bd0b69 X-Archives-Hash: 4991c1089a1c5b41c7b7c1cfa10bddc4 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >>>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2023, Andreas K Huettel wrote: >> > we have many local gpg useflags which basically just enable gpg. >> > Should we merge these to one global useflag? >> >=20 >> > Additionally we have a few gpgme useflags. >> > See also https://bugs.gentoo.org/679634 >> >=20 >> > What are your ideas? >> >=20 >>=20 >> We have also have a bunch of USE=3Dpgp and USE=3Dopenpgp, both of which = are >> more correct than USE=3Dgpg. > Yeah, typical case of "formally correct thing being way more difficult to > understand than colloquially practical thing" ... So, how about using gpg as the flag's name and mentioning OpenPGP in its description? --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQFDBAEBCAAtFiEEtDnZ1O9xIP68rzDbUYgzUIhBXi4FAmWQSzIPHHVsbUBnZW50 b28ub3JnAAoJEFGIM1CIQV4uR9kIALOK3/oMb37vw19H8XKTvRPlKnpZ8qgdMTn0 iVFXLF8VeoBrYqxN+mEeBVI9sT/VOzqwzl5NztV64nkiOkwUo6pcGxrEjNbT05b0 2x9n9wRX+q18A/7INsnZAUNGxJTxNuD7bFKGkpKK/wtIAvG86Jq66fFsiZLFdCZB nMjWfZ2jE19LG8Vu980gSxgu9TsVMiSYTq+dq716kZ4Ds0hmf+La8R0sw4APx5JF ZLJ0M0GTOgLh8eVHDcL79wHRH2EPNd9lGB43Z6CqtbZMeFBfBB2YmTe3xiwgUXHL HNX1efJlQTgDO/1YeftytMT3e39YtoBJ+h86CtVQH2VvnZ7m+lA= =keIq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--