I think we have to use multiple different texts instead of assuming that we can use something general as "Detailed import results from %1" which fits all cases in all languages.

ok, then we leave it in the certifications tab like it is.
What about the Uid tab? Keep it like it is, which is: Name, Email, Trust Level, Origin, [Tags] ?
While I do not think that the origin need to be shown by default, I don't think it's really a problem, as this is the last column

Pushed the change for adding hash tests in rC7faf542f1573: fips,tests: Add t-digest.

My comment referred exclusively to Tobias's "In the future [...]" comment.

"Tags" are stored with certifications. Therefore, I think it's useful and makes sense to show the Tags column in the Certifications view.

This is what Tobias means:

Isn't the name of the tab showing the imported certificates "Imported Certficates" or something like that? The filter "All" shows all imported certificates. And when you select the filter OpenPGP you see the subset of imported OpenPGP certificates. Therefore, I don't think it makes sense to add a custom filter.

Gpg4win 4.4:

Some questions (wishes):

• Will the upload also be done to an configured LDAP Server?
• Can the upload-checkbox setting be configure via the Windows registry?

Gpg4win 4.4: ok, now the date of the main key is preset as the expiry date of the main key if it is less then 3 years in the future. Otherwise 3 years from now is preset.

Ok, I'm not asked, therefore I set this to done, but not resolved yet, as I'm not sure if the gpg version might have an influence.

Gpg4win 4.4:
Contrary to the task description are:
a) In the certifications tab the "tags" column is shown by default
b) in the UID tab, the "origin" column is shown by default (only the "tags" column is hidden)

The only difference that you should see in the UI is that there is no longer a menu that pops up when you drop files, asking you what to do with the files. So I guess, if things works fine as you described them, you can consider the ticket done

This ticket description does not give me anything to test.

tested with Gpg4win 4.4

tested with Gpg4win 4.4

This issue looks still the same from the user perspective as in the task description with Gpg4win 4.4. Therefore tagging it for gpd5x

It seems that the internal API (as of 2024-12-06) is not enough.
Now, we have _gcry_md_hash_buffer function with the new FIPS service indicator.
It's used for public key crypto, too.
The compliance for hash function is a part of public key crypto, but not all.

A change for gcry_md_hash_* functions are pushed by rC3478caac62c7: fips,md: Implement new FIPS service indicator for gcry_md_hash_*..
It doesn't have tests with FIPS service indicator yet.

@ilf: Yes these message are emitted using log_info in 2.4.7 and 2.5.2. Thus they don't case a failure exit. I will silence them with --quiet in 2.5.3.

https://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-devel/2024-December/035686.html <- is a question to see if the situation has changed meanwhile. (I've send it to the list because the topic affects several things in the application and thus ggoes beyond an issue like this one.)