Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since you mentioned me: what's the point? It would be one thing if you could (1) use Sequoia, (2) be assured of modern cryptography, and (3) maintain compatibility with the majority of the installed base of PGP users. But you can't. That being the case, why put up with all the PGP problems that Sequoia can't address? You're losing compatibility either way, so use an actually-good cryptosystem.
(Sorry for the relatively long post; it so happened in an attempt to explain my point of view in more detail. I think variations of that do come up in such discussions, but staying unnoticed or dismissed; maybe this one will succeed.) Probably because of my limited usage of Sequoia, but it seemed compatible enough with GnuPG (when it comes to OpenPGP, that is; not their CLIs or APIs): not completely, but enough in pr…
Re: The PGP problem (2019)
#121The issue is that the modern cryptographic stuff Sequoia does isn't compatible with installed GnuPG. You can use Sequoia compatibly, but by doing so you're surrendering their cryptographic improvements.