| 1 |
On 12/29/20 5:41 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: |
| 2 |
> Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
>>> I would be happier if some other developers were able and willing to |
| 4 |
>>> participate actively in the LibreSSL project. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> But why would they do that? What I'm really missing in all the replies |
| 7 |
>> is a single reason why LibreSSL would be better for anyone. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Maybe because it is so well-known that monoculture is harmful per se, |
| 10 |
> which is why the commitment to choice in Gentoo is very valuable. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Further, LibreSSL comes out of the OpenBSD project, which has a good |
| 13 |
> reputation on code quality. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I am sympathetic to not degrading into a monoculture. If I would |
| 17 |
characterize my contribution to Gentoo over the years it would be |
| 18 |
"alt-everything". The reason being that competition between |
| 19 |
alternatives is a good thing and time will tell which way is best. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
But <- here's the "but" |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
At some point a particular path may have to be dropped because it just |
| 24 |
doesn't provide any clear advantages. There was nothing wrong with |
| 25 |
adding libressl as an alternative in 2014 since it had promise. And |
| 26 |
now, years later, I see nothing wrong with removing it. It hasn't |
| 27 |
delivered. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. |
| 31 |
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] |
| 32 |
E-Mail : blueness@g.o |
| 33 |
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA |
| 34 |
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA |
Archives