[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: compatibility with future PGP
Adam Shostack says:
> You wrote:
> | Another thing a patched 2.3 release would have to do to be fully
> | indistinguishable is to generate new version numbers itself after the
> | given date.
> While I understand that people prefer the 2.3 code because of
> its availablility outside of the US, and speed advantages, I think
> that its important to remember PGP has not really caught on in the US
> because of questions about its legality. I'm trying to push for the
> widespread use of PGP 2.5 here at the Brigham & Women's hospital where
> I work. I can't push for version 2.3 for legal reasons.
People overseas want to be able to use this program, too. There are
250 million people in the U.S., which constitutes under 1/20th of the
Earth's population. Quit being provincial. This discussion is about
what the other 4.75 billion people have to do to interoperate with the
brain-damaged MIT stuff.