Any guidance for gnupg-2.0 -> gnupg-2.1 (archived encrypted email)?

[Chris H]

On Tue, 26 May 2015 06:59:52 +1000 John Marshall
<john.marshall at riverwillow.com.au> wrote

> On Sun, 24 May 2015, 11:13 -0700, David Wolfskill wrote:
> > Last November, I encountered a reason to deviate from that: When
> > security/gnupg became gnupg-2.1, I found that gnupg-2.1 was unable to
> > decrypt some (well, any, in my experience) archived encrypted email
> > messages.
> 
> I was bitten badly in November when I blindly upgraded security/gnupg
> and found myself in the new, shiny, non-STABLE version 2.1.0.  I can't
> remember the details, but too much stuff didn't work.  I went to the
> release notes and other places and spent about a day trying to make the
> best of it.  I had some success but ended up reverting security/gnupg ->
> security/gnupg20 after I discovered the following on the GnuPG home
> page.
> 
>  - 2.0.27 is the stable version suggested for most users,
>  - 2.1.4 is the brand-new modern version with support for ECC and many
>    other new features, and
>  - 1.4.19 is the classic portable version.
> 
> The STABLE 2.0 branch still works for me and the surprise factor is not
> as prominent as in 2.1.  I have no idea why the main FreeBSD port was
> switched from STABLE to CURRENT and the STABLE version was relegated to
> a new version-tagged port.
> 
> Sorry if this is off-topic but maybe it helps some folks.
Isn't the standard way to deal with this in the ports tree, to
create <category>/portname, and <category>/portname-devel ?
Having portname track "stable", and the -devel branch track "current"?
Can gnupg be rearranged to follow this method?

CC-ing kuriyama@

--Chris
> 
> -- 
> John Marshall